3Tram  tl|^  Ctbrar^  of 

tl^^  ffitbrarg  of 
Prtnrrtntt  SIjMlngtral  ^ttnxnuryi 


THE 

OLD  LOG  HOUSE, 

A 

HISTORY  AKD  DEFENSE 

OP    THE 
BY 

T.  C.  BLAKE,  JD.D, 


Nashville,  Tenn.: 

Cumberland  Presbyterian  Publishing   H<nue^ 

1897. 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  18T7,  by 
T.  C.  BLAKE. 


PUBLISHED    FOE    THE    AUTHOR   BY   THE    OUMBEELAlin> 
PEESBYTEEIAN  PUBLISHING  HOUSE. 


TO    THE 

MEMBERS  AND  FRIENDS 

OF    THE 

eilMBEElANl)  PEESBTTEEIAN  CHURCH 

IN    THE 

UNITED    STATES    OF   AMERICA, 

THIS   LITTLE    BOOK 

IS   RESPECTFULLY   DEDICATED   BY 

^  THE   AUTHOR. 


(sy 


CONTENTS. 

Chapter  I.— The  Picture,          •         -  9 

Chapter  II. — The  Great  Rev^^val,  14 

Chapter  HI.— The  Young  Men,       -  34 

Chapter  lY.— The  Terrible  Struggle,  40 

Chapter  Y.— The  Old  Log  House,    -  53 

Chapter  YI.— The  Two  Items,     -  64 

Chapter  YII. — The  Roman  Catholic 

Church,     -         -         -         -         -  83 

Chapter  YIII.— Church  of  England 

—The  Episcopal  Church,       -       100 
Chapter    IX.  —  The     Presbyterian 

Church, 117 

Chapter  X.— The  Baptist  Church,  133 
Chapter  XL— The  Methodist  Church  166 
Chapter  XII.— Other  Churches,  -  243 
Chapter   XHL  —  The    Cumberland 

Presbyterian  Church,        -        -  265 


(5) 


PREFACE 

The  greater  portion  of  this  little  book 
was  written  several  years  ago,  but,  until 
now,  the  author  could  never  get  his  con- 
sent to  publish  it. 

Soon  after  the  publication  of  the 
Sabbath- School  Gem  was  commenced,  the 
idea  w^as  conceived  that  the  members  in 
general,  and  the  youth  in  particular,  of 
the  Cumberland  Presbyterian  Church, 
needed  a  small  work  which  would  not 
only  give  the  history  of  said  Church, 
but  would  also  give  the  points  of  differ- 
ence between  it  and  other  denominations. 
The  idea  was  soon  afterwards  put  into  ex- 
ecution ;  and,  by  devoting  Saturday  even- 
ing of  each  week  to  the  matter  in  hand, 
the  greater  part  of  the  book  was  written. 

In  gathering  the  material,  I  consulted 
every  book  within  my  reach,   which  I 

(T) 


8  PREFACE. 

thought  would  assist  me;  and  it  is  prob- 
able that,  in  some  instances,  I  may  have 
used  the  language  as  well  as  the  ideas  of 
those  consulted.  But  it  was  not  my  in- 
tention so  to  do;  and  if  any  one  should 
see  such  a  thing  without  the  proper 
credit,  he  will  understand  that  it  was  an 
oversight — was  not  intentional.  Besides, 
as  has  been  said,  the  most  of  the  manu- 
script was  prepared  several  years  ago, 
and  the  author  could  not  now  recall  all 
the  ''helps"  which  were  consulted,  to 
ascertain  whether  or  not  there  have  been 
xiny  omissions  in  giving  proper  credit. 

If  this  humble  offering  shall  contribute 
anything  towards  the  upbuilding  of  a 
Church  to  which  I  owe  a  debt  of  grati- 
tude that  can  never  be  paid,  and  in 
whose  doctrines  my  faith  grows  stronger 
every  year,  then  will  I  be  amply  com- 
pensated for  my  labors. 

T.  C.  Blake. 

:  Nashyille,  Tenn.,  December,  1877, 


THE  OLD  LOG  HOUSE. 


CHAPTER  I. 

THE    PICTURE. 

In  the  county  of  Dickson,  State  of  Ten- 
nessee, there  once  stood  an  old-fashioned, 
double  log  house.  By  turning  to  the 
first  page  of  this  book,  the  reader  will 
see  a  perfect  picture  of  that  building. 
The  man  who  erected  that  house  was 
Rev.  Samuel  McAdow.  He  was  born 
April  10, 1760,  in  Guilford  county,  J^orth 
Carolina,  and  was  the  youngest  of  eight 
children,  four  of  whom  were  sons. 

Dr.  J.  M.  Larkin,  of  Clarksville,  Ten- 
nessee, who  is  a  grandson  of  Mr.  McAdow, 
and  who,  when  he  was  a  boy,  used  to 
spend  a  great  deal  of  his  time  in  that 
sacred  old  house,  drew  the  sketch  from 

(9) 


10  THE    PICTURE. 

which  this  picture  was  engraved.  Let 
the  reader  turn  back  and  look  at  it 
closely.  The  house,  as  will  be  seen,  was 
made  of  logs;  and  it  was  a  story  and  a 
half  high.  There  was  a  wide  passage  or 
hall  between  the  two  rooms.  The  entire 
building  was  covered  with  clap-boards, 
which  were  kept  in  place  by  "weight- 
poles,"  as  they  were  called.  The  chim- 
neys were  made  of  wood,  and  dirt,  and 
rock — only  the  back  and  jambs,  however, 
were  stone.  The  logs  were  hewn  with  a 
broad-ax,  and  the  cracks  were  daubed 
with  mud.  The  windows  were  small,  as 
will  be  seen  from  the  picture;  and,  as 
there  was  no  sash  or  glass  in  them,  they 
were  closed  by  shutters  made  of  clap- 
boards, which  hung  upon  wooden  hinges. 
All  the  floors  of  the  building  were  made 
of  undressed  plank;  and  the  steps  in 
front  of  the  passage  or  hall  were  con- 
structed of  puncheons.  To  the  left  of 
the   building   there   stood   a   large   oak 


THE   PICTTTRE.  11 

tree,  and  from  beneath  the  roots  of  that 
"giant  of  the  forest"  there  bubbled  up 
a  bold,  limpid  stream  of  water.  This 
was  the  "family  spring,"  and  close  by  it, 
on  a  stick,  hung  a  large  gourd.  Hun- 
dreds, yea,  thousands,  of  weary  men, 
and  women,,  and  children  have  slaked 
their  thirst  at  this  pure  fountain;  and  to 
this  good  day  that  clear,  beautiful  stream 
pours  forth  a  vast  volume  of  water,  a 
■fit  emblem  of  the  "fountain  opened  in 
the  house  of  King  David  for  sin  and  un- 
cleanness;"  and  a  fit  emblem  too  of  the 
noble  generosity  of  the  man  who  once 
owned  the  humble  dwelling  which  stood 
hard  by. 

Mr.  McAdow  was  not  tne  only  great 
and  good  man,  however,  that  lived  in 
an  unpretending  home.  Abraham,  the 
father  of  the  Jewish  nation  and  of 
the  Church,  dwelt  in  a  tent;  Elijah,  one 
■of  the  mighty  prophets  of  Jehovah,  lived 
under  a  juniper  tree;    and  the  blessed 


12  THE    PICTURE. 

Saviour,  the  son  of  Mary  and  the  Son 
of  God,  could  say,  and  speak  truly,  "  the 
foxes  have  holes  and  the  birds  of  the  air 
have  nests,  but  the  Son  of  man  hath  not 
where  to  lay  his  head."  IN'or  is  an  hum- 
ble dwelling  any  evidence  that  purity 
may  not  reign  within.  God  sent  his 
angels  to  the  tent  of  Abraham  to  reveal 
to  him  the  doom  of  Sodom  and  Gomor- 
rah, and  he  condescended  to  talk  face  to 
face  with  Elijah  as  he  sat  under  that 
juniper  tree.  We  must  not,  therefore, 
conclude  that  because  Mr.  McAdow  lived 
in  the  humble  home  referred  to,  God  did 
not  love  him  and  dwell  with  him.  As 
was  said  before,  he  was  a  pure,  good 
man;  and,  no  doubt,  more  than  a  thou- 
sand times,  as  he  gathered  his  household 
around  the  family  -altar,  he  felt  that  God 
was  there. 

But  there  are  other  items  of  deep  and 
thrilling  interest  connected  with  this  old 
log  house,  which  will  be  revealed  at  the- 


THE    PICTURE. 


13 


proper  place;  hence  the  reader  will  par- 
don the  author  for  calling  attention  to 
other  things  for  a  short  time,  inasmuch 
as  these  matters  must  he  fully  explained, 
in  order  to  justify  and  vindicate  the 
transaction  which  subsequently  took 
place  in  that  house. 


14  THE   GEEAT   REVIVAL. 


CHAPTER  II. 

THE    GREAT    REVIVAL. 

In  the  early  history  of  Tennessee  and 

Kentucky  a  great  deal  is  said  of  the 
"  Cumberland  Country."  This  included 
that  portion  of  the  two  States  just  men- 
tioned which  lies  West  of  the  Cumber- 
land mountains  between  the  Green  and 
Tennessee  rivers.  It  is  one  of  the  most 
beautiful  and  productive  portions  of  the 
United  States,  and  the  city  of  !N"ashville 
is  its  geographical  and  commercial  cen- 
ter. This  rich  and  fertile  country,  which 
has  just  been  spoken  of,  once  belonged 
to  the  Indians,  and  not  until  1780  was 
there  a  permanent  settlement  made  by 
the  whites.  In  a  short  time  afterwards, 
however,  hundreds  and  thousands  of  the 
most  brave  and  enterprising  citizens  of 


THE    GREAT   REVIVAL.  15 

Virginia  and  N'orth  Carolina  immigrated 
to  the  land  which  they  believed  "flowed 
with  milk  and  honey."  But,  while  the 
land  was  very  rich,  the  people,  in  one 
sense,  were  very  poor,  for  they  had  for- 
gotten the  promise  in  that  best  of  all 
books  which  says,  "  Seek  ye  first  the 
kingdom  of  God  and  his  righteousness, 
and  all  these  things  (earthly  comforts) 
shall  be  added  to  you."  Like  Lot,  they 
saw  that  the  land  was  "  even  as  the  gar- 
den of  the  Lord,"  and  like  that  same 
selfish  man,  they  were  willing  to  pitch 
their  tents  "toward  Sodom!" 

In  order  that  the  reader  may  know 
something  of  the  condition  of  the  "  Cum- 
berland Country"  at  that  time,  a  short 
extract  is  here  inserted  from  the  pen  of 
Rev  Dr.  Davidson,  a  minister  in  the 
Presbyterian  Church.     Be  says: 

"A  decided  majority  of  the  people 
were  reputed  to  be  infidels,  and  as  infi- 
delity is  the  prolific  parent  of  vice,  it  is 


16  THE    GREAT   REVIVAL. 

uot  surprisiDg  to  find  that  the  whole 
country  was  reraarkahle  for  vice  and  dis- 
sipation. A  melancholy  spectacle  is  pre- 
sented to  our  view.  We  behold  infidelity 
and  vice  combined,  rolling  their  turbid 
tide  over  the  land,  while  the  Church,  that 
should  have  been  busily  erecting  bar- 
riers to  arrest  its  progress,  is  either  be- 
numbed by  covetousness  or  wasting  her 
energies  in  frivolous  disputes.  *  *  * 
The  elder  clergy  were  few  and  past 
their  prime.  They  had  been  useful  in 
gathering  the  people  into  congregations, 
and  introducing  the  rudiments  of  Church 
order,  but  the  altered  times  demanded  a 
more  active  kind  of  labors.  The  most 
of  them  were  not  above  mediocrity ;  nor 
was  the  dullness  of  the  ax  compensated 
by  putting  thereto  more  strength.  Ac- 
customed to  a  certain  fixed  routine,  they 
could  not  move  out  of  it.  They  were 
men  of  some  information,  and  sound  in 
the  faith,  but  not  deeply  imbued  with 


THE   GREAT   REVIVAL.  17 

the  spirit  of  the  gospel.  Coming  from 
various  parts  of  the  older  States,  they 
brought  with  them  the  petty  prejudices 
and  sectional  jealousies  to  which  they 
had  been  habituated;  and,  living  far 
apart,  they  had  little  opportunity  of  be- 
coming acquainted  with  each  other,  and' 
acquiring  that  mutual  confidence  which 
would  have  enabled  them  to  act  with 
concert  and  efficiency.  They  were  a 
stately  and  dignified  set  of  men,  the  re- 
serve of  whose  manners  had  the  effect  of 
keeping  people  at  a  distance,  and  check- 
ing familiarity.  The  formal  and  set 
method  to  which  they  adhered,  was  bet- 
ter adapted  to  build  up  believers  than  tO' 
awaken  the  unconverted.  *  *  *  *^ 
The  approach  of  young  persons  to  the 
communion  was  a  rarity  never  expected^ 
It  was  the  general  impression  that  none- 
but  elderly  persons,  who  from  their  years- 
had  acquired  steady  habits  and  were  out 
of  the  way  of  temptation,  should  par-^ 
2 


18  THE    GREAT    REVIVAL. 

take  of  the  ordinance.  As  a  natural 
consequence,  the  young  felt  at  ease,  and 
gave  themselves  no  concern  about  re- 
ligion; and  the  Church,  gaining  no  ac- 
cessions, was  in  a  fair  way  of  becoming 
extinct  through  natural  decrease." 

This  is  truly  a  gloomy  picture,  but  it  is 
doubtless  correct.  There  were  preachers 
living  in  all  the  settled  portions  of  the 
country,  and  some  of  them  were  very 
learned  men,  but  they  were  cold,  formal, 
and  lifeless  in  their  services.  They  talked 
a  great  deal  of  the  ''elect  of  God,''  but 
they  did  not  say  much  about  the  ''new 
birth" — the  religion  of  the  heart.  Such 
preaching  of  course  did  but  little  good. 
The  gospel,  therefore,  was  a  savor  of 
death  unto  death,  instead  of  being  a 
savor  of  life  unto  life.  The  truth  is, 
some  of  the  preachers  of  those  days  were 
not  converted  men !  Rev.  James  Me- 
Gready,  a  minister  in  the  Presbyterian 
Church,  preached  for  several   years  be- 


THE    GREAT   REVIVAL.  19 

fore  he  was  a  Christian!  Others  could 
be  named  who  did  the  same  thing,  but 
such  items  of  history  are  unpleasant. 
jSTo  wonder  then  that  the  Church  was 
cold  and  indiiferent.  'No  wonder  that 
sinners  were  not  heard  crying,  "  Men  and 
brethren,  what  shall  we  do  to  be  saved?" 
It  was  not  the  will  of  God,  however, 
that  such  a  country  should  be  so  com- 
pletely under  the  influence  of  Satan. 
He  therefore  raised  up  the  proper  instru- 
ment to  correct  the  evil.  One  night  af- 
ter Mr.  McGready  (the  minister  whose 
name  has  just  been  mentioned)  had  re- 
tired, he  overheard  two  friends,  who 
were  lodging  in  the  same  room,  talking 
about  his  case.  They  did  not  believe 
that  he  was  a  converted  man.  This  led 
him  to  a  close  self-examination ;  where- 
upon he  came  to  the  conclusion  that  they 
were  correct.  He  at  once  sought  the 
salvation  of  his  soul,  and  at  a  sacra- 
mental meeting  which  was  held  neaitthe 


20  THE    GREAT   REVIVAL. 

Monongahela  River,  in  the  State  of  Penn- 
sylvania, he  found  "the  pearl  of  great 
price."  This  occurred  in  the  year  1786. 
Soon  after  this  took  place  he  removed  to 
the  State  of  ISTorth  Carolina — the  State 
in  which  he  was  born.  The  conversion  of 
the  Apostle  Paul  scarcely  produced  a 
greater  change  in  his  history  than  did 
this  remarkable  event  in  the  life  of  Mr, 
McGready.  From  this  time  on,  the 
character  of  his  preaching  was  entirely 
changed.  He  spoke  in  thunder  tones  to 
the  sinner,  saying,  "Ye  must  be  born 
again."  He  also  insisted  upon  time  and 
'place  religion — that  sinners  should  know 
the  time  when  and  the  jplace  where  they 
were  converted.  Such  preaching  in 
those  days,  as  a  matter  of  course,  awak- 
ened terrible  opposition,  and  at  one  time 
a  letter  was  written  to  him  in  blood, 
telling  him  if  he  did  not  leave  the  coun- 
try that  his  life  would  be  taken!  As 
evid^ence  that  the  people  were  in  earnest 


THE    GREAT   REVIVAL.  21 

in  this  matter,  they  assembled,  destroyed 
the  seats  of  his  church  and  burnt  his 
pulpit  to  ashes!  Just  such  bitter  oppo- 
sition, however,  did  the  disciples  of  the 
blessed  Saviour  meet  with ! 

In  1796,  Mr.  McGrready  removed  to 
Logan  county,  Kentucky.  There  he 
took  charge  of  three  small  congregations 
of  the  Presbyterian  Church.  The  names 
of  the  congregations  were  Muddy  Eiver, 
Gasper  River,  and  Red  River.  He 
preached  as  he  had  done  in  iJ^orth  Caro- 
lina, and  not  unfrequently  the  questions 
would  be  asked  him,  "Is  religion  some- 
thing that  can  be  felt?"  "If  a  sinner  is 
converted  will  he  know  it?"  Mr.  Mc 
Gready  saw  that  there  was  a  great  work 
to  be  done,  consequently  he  entered  into 
a  most  solemn  covenant  with  the  few 
Christians  who  believed  as  he  did,  that 
they  would  for  one  year  spend  the  third 
Saturday  of  each  month  as  a  day  of  fast- 
ing and  prayer  for  the  conversio'^  '^f  sin- 


22  THE    GEE  AT    REVIVAL. 

ners,  and  one-half  hour  each  Saturday, 
at  the  hour  of  sunset,  and  the  same 
length  of  time  each  Sabbath  morningy 
at  the  hour  of  sunrise,  for  a  general  out- 
pouring of  God's  Spirit,  and  for  a  great 
revival  of  religion.  Their  prayers  were 
answered,  for  in  a  short  time  there  com- 
menced one  of  the  most  powerful  revi- 
vals of  religion  ever  witnessed  on  the 
American  continent. 

In  a  letter  to  a  friend,  postmarked 
Logan  County,  Kentucky,  and  dated 
October  23,  1801,  Mr.  McGready  thus 
describes  it: 

"In  the  month  of  May,  1797,  which 
was  the  spring  after  I  came  to  thi& 
country,  the  Lord  graciously  visited 
Gasper  liiver  congregation  (an  infant 
church  then  under  my  charge).  The 
doctrines  of  regeneration,  faith,  and  re- 
pentance, which  I  uniformly  preached, 
seemed  to  call  the  attention  of  the  peo- 
ple  to  a  serious   inquiry.     During    the 


THE    GREAT    REVIVAL.  23 

winter  the  questions  were  often  proposed 
to  me,  Is  religion  a  sensible  thing?  If  I 
were  converted,  would  I  feel  it  and  know 
it? 

In  May,  as  I  said,  the  work  began. 
A  woman,  who  had  been  a  professor, 
in  full  communion  with  the  church, 
found  her  old  hope  false  and  delusive; 
she  was  struck  with  deep  conviction, 
and  in  a  few  days  was  filled  with  joy 
and  peace  in  believing.  She  immedi- 
ately visited  her  friends  and  relatives, 
from  house  to  house,  and  warned  them 
of  their  danger  in  a  most  solemn,  faith- 
ful manner,  and  plead  with  them  to  re- 
pent and  seek  religion.  This,  as  a 
means,  was  accompanied  with  the  divine 
blessing  to  the  awakening  of  many. 
About  this  time  the  ears  of  all  in  ^at 
congregation  seemed  to  be  open  to  re- 
ceive the  word  preached,  and  almost 
every  sermon  was  accompanied  with  the 
po^ver  of  God  to  the  awakening  of  sin- 


24  THE    GREAT   REVIVAL. 

ners.  During  the  summer,  about  ten 
persons  in  the  congregation  were  brought 
to  Christ.  In  the  Ml  of  the  year,  a 
general  deadness  seemed  to  creep  on 
apace.  Conviction  and  conversion  work, 
in  a  great  measure,  ceased ;  and  no  visible 
alteration  for  the  better  took  place  until 
the  summer  of  1798,  at  the  administra- 
tion of  the  sacrament  of  the  Supper, 
which  was  in  July.  On  Monday  the 
Lord  graciously  poured  ont  his  Spirit;  a 
very  general  awakening  took  place; 
perhaps  but  few  families  in  the  congre- 
gation could  be  found  who,  less  or  more, 
were  not  struck  with  an  awful  sense  of 
their  lost  estate.  During  the  week  follow- 
ing but  few  persons  attended  to  worldly 
matters,  their  attention  to  the  business 
of  their  souls  was  so  great.  On  the  first 
Sabbath  of  September  the  sacrament 
was  administered  at  Muddy  River  (one  of 
my  congregations).  At  this  meeting  the 
Lord  graciously  poured  forth  his  Spirit 


THE    GREAT    REVIVAL  25 

to  the  awakening  of  many  careless  sin- 
ners. Through  these  two  congregations 
already  mentioned,  and  through  Red 
Kiver,  my  other  congregation,  awaken- 
ing work  went  on  with  power  under 
•every  sermon.  The  people  seemed  to 
hear  as  for  eternity.  In  every  house, 
and  almost  in  every  company,  the  whole 
<jonversation  with  people  was  about  the 
state  of  their  souls.  About  this  time 
Rev.  J.  B.  came  here,  and  found  a  Mr. 
R.  to  join  him.  In  a  little  time  he  in- 
volved our  infant  churches  in  confusion, 
-disputation,  etc. ;  opposed  the  doctrines 
preached  here;  ridiculed  the  whole  work 
of  the  revival;  formed  a  considerable 
party,  etc.,  etc.  In  a  few  weeks  this 
seemed  to  have  put  a  final  stop  to  the 
-whole  work,  and  our  infant  congrega- 
tion remained  in  a  state  of  deadness 
and  darkness  from  the  fall,  through  the 
winter,  and  until  the  month  of  July, 
1799,  at  the  administration  of  the  sacra- 


26  THE    GREAT   REVIVAL. 

ment  at  Red  River.  This  was  a  ver}: 
solemn  time  throughout.  On  Monda}' 
the  power  of  God  seemed  to  fill  the  eon- 
gregation;  the  boldest,  daring  sinners  in 
the  country  covered  their  faces  and  wept 
bitterly.  After  the  congregation  was 
dismissed,  a  large  number  of  people 
stayed  about  the  doors,  unwilling  to  go 
away.  Some  of  the  ministers  proposed 
to  me  to  collect  the  people  in  the  meet- 
ing house  again,  and  perform  prayer 
with  them;  accordingly  we  went  in,  and 
joined  in  prayer  and  exhortation.  The 
mighty  power  of  God  came  amongst  u& 
like  a  shower  from  the  everlasting  hills- 
— God's  people  were  quickened  and  com- 
forted; yea,  some  of  them  were  tilled 
with  joy  unspeakable,  and  full  of  glory. 
Sinners  were  powerfully  alarmed,  and 
some  precious  souls  were  brought  ta 
feel  the  pardoning  love  of  Jesus. 

At  Gasper  River  (at  this  time  under 
the  care  of  Mr.  Rankin,  a  precious  in- 


THE    GREAT    REVIVAL.  27 

strument  in  the  hand  of  God),  the  sacra- 
ment was  administered  in  August.  This 
was  one  of  the  days  of  the  Son  of 
Man,  indeed,  especially  on  Monday.  I 
preached  a  plain  gospel  sermon  on  Heb. 
xi.  16 :— "  The  Better  Country."  A  great 
solemnity  continued  during  the  sermon. 
After  sermon,  Mr.  Rankin  gave  a  solemn 
exhortation — the  congregation  was  then 
dismissed;  but  the  people  all  kept  their 
seats  for  a  considerable  space,  whilst  aw- 
ful solemnity  appeared  in  the  counte- 
nances of  a  large  majority.  Presently 
several  persons  under  deep  conviction 
broke  forth  into  a  large  outcry — many 
fell  to  the  ground,  lay  powerless,  groan- 
ing, praying,  and  crying  for  mercy.  As 
I  passed  through  the  multitude,  a 
woman,  lying  in  awful  distress,  called 
me  to  her.  Said  she:  'I  lived  in  your 
congregation  in  Carolina ;  I  was  a  pro- 
fessor, and  often  went  to  communion; 
but  I  was  deceived;    I  have  no  religion: 


28  THE    GREAT    REVIVAL. 

I  am  going  to  hell.'  In  another  place 
an  old  gray-headed  man  lay  in  an  agony 
of  distress,  addressing  his  weeping  wife 
and  children  in  such  language  as  this: 
'We  are  all  going  to  hell  together;  we 
have  lived  prayerless,  ungodly  lives ;  the 
work  of  our  souls  is  yet  to  begin ;  we 
must  get  religion,  or  we  will  all  be 
damned.'  But  time  would  fail  me  to 
mention  every  instance  of  this  kind 

At  Muddy  River  the  sacrament  was 
administered  in  September.  The  power 
of  God  was  gloriously  present  on  this 
occasion.  The  circumstances  of  it  are 
equal,  if  not  superior,  to  those  of  Gasper 
River.  Many  souls  were  solemnly  awak- 
ened; a  number,  we  hope,  converted— 
whilst  the  people  of  God  feasted  on  the 
hidden  manna,  and,  with  propriety, 
might  be  said  to  sing  the  new  song. 

But  the  year  1800  exceeds  all  that  my 
eyes  ever  beheld  upon  earth.  All  tbat 
I  have  related,  is  only,  as  it  were,  an  in- 


THE    GREAT    REVIVAL.  29 

troduction.  Although  many  souls  in 
these  congregations,  during  the  three 
preceding  years,  have  been  savingly  con- 
verted, and  now  give  living  evidences  of 
their  union  to  Christ ;  yet  all  that  work 
is  only  like  a  few  drops  before  a  mighty 
rain,  when  compared  with  the  wonders 
of  Almighty  grace  that  took  place  in 
tlie  year  1800. 

In  June  the  sacrament  was  adminis- 
tered at  Red  Elver.  This  was  the 
gi'eatest  time  we  had  ever  seen.  On 
Monday  multitudes  were  struck  down 
under  awful  conviction;  the  cries  of 
the  distressed  filled  the  whole  house. 
There  you  might  see  profane  swearers 
and  Sabbath  breakers  pricked  to  the 
heart,  and  crying  out,  "What  shall 
we  do  to  be  saved?"  There,  too, 
frolickers  and  dancers  were  crying  for 
mercy.  There  you  might  see  little 
children  of  ten,  eleven,  and  twelve  years 
of  age,  praying,  and  crying  for  redemp- 


60  THE    GREAT   REVIVAL. 

tion  in  the  blood  of  Jesus,  in  agonies  of 
distress.     ^     ^     -^ 

In  July  the  sacrament  was  adminis- 
tered in  Gasper  River  congregation. 
Here  multitudes  crowded  in  from  all 
parts  of  the  country  to  see  a  strange 
work,  from  the  distance  of  forty,  fifty, 
and  even  a  hundred  miles;  whole  fami- 
lies came  in  their  wagons;  between 
twenty  and  thirty  wagons  were  brought 
to  the  place,  loaded  with  people  and 
their  provisions,  in  order  to  encamp  at 
the  meeting  house.  On  Friday  nothing 
n:tore  appeared,  during  the  day,  than  a 
decent  solemnity.  On  Saturday  matters 
continued  in  the  same  way,  until  in  the 
evening.  Two  pious  women  were  sitting 
together,  conversing  about  their  exer- 
cises; wliich  conversation  seemed  to  af- 
fect some  of  the  by-standers;  instantly 
the  divine  flame  spread  through  the 
whole  multitude.  Presently  you  might 
have   seen    sinners   lying    powerless    in 


THE   GREAT   REVIVAL.  6j 

€very  part  of  the  house,  praying  and 
trying  for  mercy.  Ministers  and  private 
Christians  were  kept  busy  during  the 
night  conversing  with  the  distressed. 
This  night  a  goodly  number  of  awak- 
ened souls  were  delivered  by  sweet  be- 
lieving views  of  the  glory,  fullness,  and 
sufficiency  of  Christ,  to  save  to  the  utter- 
most. Amongst  these  were  some  little 
children — a  striking  proof  of  the  relig- 
ion of  Jesus.  Of  many  instances,  to 
which  I  have  been  an  eye-witness,  I  shall 
only  mention  one,  viz. :  a  little  girl. 
I  stood  by  her  whilst  she  lay  across  her 
mother's  lap  almost  in  despair.  I  was 
conversing  with  her  when  the  first  gleam 
of  light  broke  in  upon  her  mind — she 
started  to  her  feet,  and  in  an  ecstasy  of 
joy,  she  cried  out,  '  0,  he  is  willing,  he  is 
willing!  He  is  come,  he  is  come!  0, 
what  a  sweet  Christ  he  is !  0,  what  a 
precious  Christ  he  is !  0,  what  a  fullness 
I  see  in  him!    O,  what  a  beauty  I  see  in 


32  THE    GREAT   REVIVAL. 

him !  O,  why  was  it  that  I  never  could 
believe!  that  I  never  could  come  to 
Christ  before,  when  Christ  was  so  will- 
ing to  save  me?'  Then,  turning  rounds 
she  addressed  sinners,  and  told  them  of 
the  glory,  willingness,  and  preciousnes& 
of  Christ,  and  plead  with  them  to  re- 
pent; and  all  this  in  language  so  heav- 
enly, and,  at  the  same  time,  so  rational 
and  scriptural,  that  I  was  filled  with 
astonishment.  But  were  I  to  write  you 
every  particular  of  this  kind  that  I  have 
been  an  eye  and  ear  witness  to,  during 
the  past  two  years,  it  would  fill  many 
sheets  of  paper."     *     *     * 

!N"o  one  can  read  the  foregoing  without 
thinking  of  the  day  of  Pentecost,  de- 
scribed by  Luke  in  the  second  chapter 
of  Acts.  In  Mr.  McGready's  descrip- 
tion of  that  great  revival,  it  is  hoped 
that  the  youth  who  may  read  this  book 
will  not  fail  to  notice  the  account  which 
he  gave  of  the  deep  interest  which  chil 


THE    GREAT   REVIVAL.  33 

dren  took  in  that  great  work,  especially. 
of  that  sweet  little  girl  who  embraced 
religion  while  on  her  mother's  lap.  The 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  still  lives:  and  he  is 
just  as  willing  to  bless  little  children 
now  as  he  was  in  that  great  revival; 
just  as  willing  as  while  on  earth  he 
took  them  in  his  arms  and  blessed  them, 
and  said,  of  such  is  the  kingdom  of 
heaven. 


84  THE   YOUNG  MEN. 


CHAPTER  in. 

THE    YOUNG   MEN. 

The  great  revival,  spoken  of  in  the  last 
chapter,  occurred  in  the  territory  occu- 
pied by  the  Transylvania  Presbytery  ot 
the  Presbyterian  Church,  and  in  that 
Presbytery  were  two  parties — a  revival 
party  and  an  anti-revival  party.  Minis- 
ters of  the  right  kind  were,  therefore, 
very  scarce.  God's  good  Spirit  was  at 
work  among  the  people,  and  sinners,  by 
the  thousand,  were  crying  out,  "What 
must  we  do  to  be  saved?"  but  there  were 
comparatively  few  preachers  who  seemed 
to  take  much  interest  in  the  work;  many 
of  them  actually  opposed  it — even  made 
sport  of  it,  calling  the  friends  of  the  re- 
vival ''new  lights,"  "fanatics,"  etc.  But 
this  was  not  tlie  first  time  in  the  world's 


THE   YOUNG   MEN.  35 

history  that  good  men  were  opposed  and 
ridiculed.  On  the  day  of  Pentecost  there 
were  those  present  who  accused  Peter 
and  the  rest  of  the  apostles  of  being  "  full 
of  new  wine!"  The  false  charge^how- 
-everjdid  not  put  an  end  to  the  great  work, 
as  will  be  seen  by  reading  the  second 
■chapter  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  nor 
did  the  opposition  of  the  enemies  of  the 
revival  of  1800  stop  that  great,  rising, 
swelling  tide  of  Jehovah's  love. 

As  was  previously  stated,  ministers  of 
the  right  kind  were  very  scarce,  and  the 
question  which  greatly  disturbed  the 
friends  of  the  revival  was.  What  shall  we 
■do  for  earnest,  consecrated  men  to  lead 
sinners  to  the  cross  of  Christ?  The  re- 
vival preachers,  as  they  were  called,  were 
greatly  troubled  upon  this  point,  but  the 
•God  to  whom  they  looked  for  guidance 
«oon  relieved  their  minds.  The  E-ev. 
Dr.  Rice,  who  was  an  old,  experienced 
minister   in    the    Presbyterian    Church, 


36  THE   YOUNG   MEN. 

having  heard  of  the  great  revival,  deter- 
mined that  he  would  visit  the  "  Cumber- 
land Country,"  and  see  for  himself.  After 
a  calm  and  quiet  survey  of  the  whole 
work,  he  advised  the  revival  ministers 
to  encourage  a  number  of  young  men 
(who  might  feel  it  to  be  their  duty  to  do 
so)  to  exercise  their  gifts  publicly,  and  to 
preach  the  gospel,  although  they  might 
not  have  enjoyed  the  advantages  of  a 
regular  collegiate  education.  The  sug- 
gestion was  a  good  one — the  very  one 
that  should  have  been  made — and,  no 
doubt, the  day  of  eternity  will  reveal  the 
fact  that  God's  blessed  Spirit  prompted 
the  good  man  to  give  that  advice.  Among 
those  who  had  professed  religion  in  that 
great  revival,  there  were  several  young 
men  of  fine  promise,  the  names  of  three 
of  whom  were  Finis  Ewing,  Alexander 
Anderson,  and  Samuel  King.  These 
precious  young  brethren  labored  almost 
day  and   night,  and  their  efibrts  were 


THE    YOUNG    ME^.  37 

owned  and   blessed  by  tbe  great  Head 
of  the  Church. 

The  Bible  has  given  us  an  excellent  rule 
by  which  we  may  judge,  and  that  rule  is, 
"Ye  shall  know  them  by  their  fruits." 
Applying  this  rule  to  the  young  men 
under  consideration,  we  are  obliged  to 
conclude  that  they  were  good  men,  and 
were  doing  the  will  of  God ;  for,  wherever 
they  preached,  sinners  by  the  score  were 
convicted  and  converted.  The  people 
heard  them  gladly,  and  they  were  de- 
lighted that  Dr.  Rice  had  encouraged 
these  young  "sons  of  thunder"  to  go 
forth  and  preach  Jesus  to  a  lost  and  per- 
ishing world.  But,  strange  to  tell,  these 
young  men  had  some  most  bitter  ene- 
mies. In  the  Transylvania  Presbytery, 
as  has  been  previously  stated,  there  were 
two  parties  among  the  ministry — a  revi- 
val part}^  and  an  anti- revival  party. 
Those  who  were  opposed  to  the  revival 
did  all  in  their  power  against  these  young 


38  THE   YOUNG   MEN. 

men,  and  when  the  time  came  for  the 
young  brethren  to  read  their  discourses, 
^  the  anti-revival  party  would  not  consent 
to  have  them  read  in  open  Presbytery! 
Dr.  Rice,  however,  heard  them  privately, 
and  he  was  so  impressed  with  the  belief 
that  the  hand  of  God  was  in  this  matter, 
that  he  urged  the  Presbytery  to  encour- 
age them  in  their  work.  Six  months 
afterwards,  at  the  fall  meeting  of  the 
Presbytery,  it  was  so  evident  that  the 
good  Lord  was  blessing  the  labors  oi 
these  young  men,  that  the  Presbytery 
yielded  to  the  wishes  of  the  people  and 
licensed  these  young  brethren  to  preach 
the  gospel.  It  is  worthy  of  particular 
notice  in  this  connection,  however,  that 
these  young  men  adopted  in  their  licens- 
ure the  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith, 
"  with  the  exception  of  the  idea  of  fatal- 
ity." But  this  point  will  come  up  again 
after  awhile. 

The  young  men  were  licensed  in  the 


THE    YOUNG    MEN.  39 

fall  of  1802,  and  in  October  of  the  same 
year,  the  Synod  of  Kentucky  divided  the 
Transylvania  Presbytery,  and  called  the 
new  one  which  was  formed  the  Cumber- 
land Presbytery.  In  this  latter  Presby- 
tery there  were  ten  ordained  ministers^ 
five  of  whom  belonged  to  the  reviva} 
party  and  five  to  the  anti-revival  party 
The  names  of  the  first  were  James  Mc- 
Gready,  William  Hodge,  William  Mc- 
Gee,  John  Rankin,  and  Samuel  McAdow ; 
the  names  of  the  others  were  Thomas 
B.  Craighead,  James  Balch,  John  Bow- 
man, Samuel  Donnell,  and  Terah  Temp- 
iin.  The  most  of  the  latter  class  turned 
out  badly;  some  of  them  were  deposed 
from  the  ministry,  and  the  others  sunk 
into  the  obscurity  which  they  so  justly 
deserved.  The  former  class  lived  to  an 
honorable  old  age,  and  died  universally 
respected  by  all  good  people,  except 
Mr.  Rankin,  who,  late  in  life,  tarnished 
his  reputation  by  joining  the  Shakers. 


40  THE    TERRIBLE    STRUGGLE. 


CHAPTEE  lY. 

THE    TERRIBLE    STRUGGLE. 

People  of  strong  and  wicked  preju- 
dices are,  in  the  main,  restless  and  unfor- 
giving; consequently,  the  anti-revival 
ministers  did  all  in  their  power  to  annoy 
and  vex  the  good  men  who  were  engaged 
in  the  blessed  work  spoken  of  in  the- 
last  chapter.  They  called  them  by  hard 
names,  and  did  their  utmost  to  induce 
the  people  to  turn  away  from  such  a 
ministry.  Finding  that  they  could  not 
succeed  in  this,  they  then  made  an  efibrt 
to  induce  the  Synod  of  Kentucky  to 
take  action  upon  the  subject.  The 
Transylvania  Presbytery,  it  will  be  re- 
membered, belonged  to  that  Synod,  and 
so  did  the  new  one,  called  the  Cumber- 
land Presbytery,  which  had  been  formed 


THE    TERRIBLE    STRUGGLE.  41 

out  of  the  Transylvania  Presbytery. 
But,  according  to  the  system  of  govern- 
ment of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  the 
Presbytery,  and  not  the  Synod,  has  the 
power  to  decide  as  to  the  character  and 
qualifications  of  the  men  who  enter  the 
ministry.  To  prove  that  this  is  true,  see 
Form  of  Government,  Chap.  X.,  Sec.  8, 
of  the  Confession  of  Faith  of  the  Pres- 
byterian Church.  The  language  is  ex- 
plicit, and  is  as  follows:  "The  Presby- 
tery has  power  *  *  *  to  examine  and 
license  candidates  for  the  holy  ministry ; 
to  ordain,  install,  remove,  and  judge 
ministers,"  etc.  l!Tow,  by  examining  the 
same  book.  Chap.  XL,  it  will  be  seen  that 
the  Synod  has  no  such  powers.  It  can 
judge  Presbyteries,  but  it  cannot  judge 
the  individual  members  of  Presbytery, 
unless  individual  cases  have  been  carried 
by  appeal  from  the  Presbytery  to  Synod; 
and  even  in  such  instances  the  Synod 
4oes  not  really  judge  the  jperson,  but  the 


42  THE    TERRIBLE    STRUGGLE. 

case — simply  decides  whether  or  not  the 
Presbytery  has  acted  according  to  law.. 
But,  strange  to  say,  the  Kentucky 
Synod  was  guilty  of  the  folly  of  attempt- 
ing to  try  the  individual  members  of  the 
Cumberland  Presbytery,  for  it  went 
through  the  formality  of  summoning  all 
the  members  of  said  Presbytery  to  at- 
tend "the  next  stated  meeting  of  the 
Synod."  Of  course  no  one  paid  any  at- 
tention to  such  an  unreasonable  "cita- 
tion" ;  for  the  same  Confession  of  Faith 
previously  quoted,  says :  "  Process  against 
a  gospel  minister  shall  always  be  en- 
tered before  the  Presbytery  of  which  he 
is  a  member."  The  same  Synod  which 
did  this  unlawful  thing,  appointed  "a 
committee  to  attend  the  earliest  meetings 
of  Cumberland  Presbytery,  and  report 
the  result  of  their  observations."  What 
folly !  yea,  what  impudence !  Who  ever 
heard  of  such  a  thing  before?  The 
committee  appointed  evidentl}^  felt  that 


THE    TERRIBLE    STRUGGLE.  43 

it  was  an  outrage,  for  it  paid  no  at- 
tention to  the  matter.  But,  to  cap  the 
climax,  the  same  Synod,  in  October, 
1805,  appointed  a  Commission,  composed 
of  ten  ministers  and  six  elders,  "vested 
with  full  Synodical  powers,"  to  confer 
with  the  members  of  Cumberland  Pres- 
bytery, "and  adjadicate  upon  their  Pres- 
byterial  proceedings,  which  appear  upon 
the  minutes  of  said  Presbytery."  (See 
Minutes  of  Synod  of  Kentucky.)  It  is 
unnecessary  to  consume  time  to  show 
that  this  was  contrary  to  the  genius  of 
Presbyterianism.  A  Commission  "  vested 
with  full  Synodical  powers"!  'No  won- 
der that  Mr.  Davidson,  the  partial  histo- 
rian of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  admits 
that  the  like  had  never  been  done  be- 
fore; nor  is  it  strange  that  Kev.  J.  P. 
"Wilson,  one  of  the  most  prominent 
ministers  in  the  Presbyterian  Church, 
after  a  thorough  examination  of  the 
case,    pronounced     it    unconstitutional. 


44  THE    TERRIBLE    STRUGGLE. 

But  at  the  appointed  time  and  place,  that 
Commission  met  the  revival  party. 
The  following  is  a  list  of  the  ordained 
ministers  who  belonged  to  the  revival 
party :  James  McGready,  William  Hodge, 
John  Rankin,  William  McGee,  Samuel 
McAdow,  Finis  Ewing,  Samuel  King, 
Thomas  I^elson,  Samuel  Ilodge,  and 
James  Ilawe.  Among  the  licentiates, 
we  find  the  names  of  Hugh  Kirkpatrick, 
James  B.  Porter,  Robert  Bell,  and  David 
Foster;  among  the  candidates,  Thonr.as 
Calhoun,  Robert  Guthrie,  Samuel  K. 
Blythe,  and  Samuel  Donnell. 

Rev.  Mr.  Hawe,  whose  name  appears 
in  the  foregoing  list  of  ordained  minis- 
ters, was  at  one  time  a  preacher  in  the 
Methodist  Church.  The  Commission, 
however,  seemed  to  have  some  doubt  as 
to  his  theological  views ;  and,  though  he 
was  an  ordained  minister,  they  pro- 
posed to  take  him  up  and  examine  him. 
He,   of    course,   indignantly   refused   to 


THE    TERRIBLE    STRUGGLE.  45 

submit  to  such  procedure.  But  the 
Commission  was  not  to  be  thwarted — 
the  members  composing  it  had  met  to 
have  an  ecclesiastical  battle.  After 
much  labor,  therefore,  two  charges  were 
made  against  the  Presbytery.  First, 
Candidates  in  their  licensure  and  ordi- 
nation had  been  permitted  to  adopt  the 
Confession  of  Faith,  with  the  reserva- 
tion, "  So  far  as  they  deemed  it  agreea- 
ble w^ith  the  word  of  God."  Second, 
The  literary  qualifications  required  by 
the  Confession  of  Faith  had  been  dis- 
pensed with. 

Immediately  after  making  out  these 
two  charges,  the  Commission  resolved  to 
examine  the  young  men,  and  see  if  their 
qualifications  were  such  as  the  Confes- 
sion of  Faith  of  the  Presbyterian  Church 
demanded.  The  old  ministers  of  the  re- 
vival party  boldly  and  fearlessly  took  the 
position  that  the  Commission  had  no 
authority  to  make  such  a  demand;    and 


46  THE   TERRIBLE    STRUGGLE. 

thej  refused  to  have  the  young  men  ex- 
amined. The  Commission  then  called 
upon  the  young  men  to  submit  to  the 
examination.  Eev.  Finis  Ewing,  who 
was  one  of  those  said  to  have  been  "  ir- 
regularly licensed  and  ordained,"  arose 
and  said :  "  *  If  any  man  lack  wisdom,  let 
him  ask  of  God.'  We  therefore  request 
that  we  be  permitted  to  retire  to  ask 
counsel  of  the  Most  High,  before  we 
give  our  answer."  Some  of  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Commission  made  sport  of 
the  practice  of  going  to  the  secret  grove 
for  prayer,  as  was  common  during  the 
great  revival.  One  of  the  Commission, 
by  the  name  of  Allen,  who  had  been 
Clerk  of  the  Court  in  Green  County, 
"said  that  he  had  seen  prisoners  at  the 
bar  of  justice,  and  criminals  at  the  gal- 
lows; but  that  this  was  the  first  time  he 
had  ever  known  men  to  be  denied  the 
privilege  of  prayer  under  any  circum- 
stances."     The    remark    of    Mr.    Allen 


THE    TERRIBLE    STRUGGLE.  47 

eileuced  all  opposition,  and  the  young 
men  were  permitted  to  retire.  All  of 
them  repaired  separately  and  alone  to  the 
silent  grove.  Mr.  Hutchinson,  who  was 
xin  eye-witness,  thus  describes  the  scene. 
Says  he :  "  They  were  completely  out  of 
sight  of  each  other,  but  perhaps  not  en- 
tirely out  of  hearing.  I  also  was  alone; 
while  some  were  on  my  right,  and  some 
on  my  left.  I  remember  for  a  few  min- 
utes there  was  a  profound  silence.  Then 
faint  whispers  and  low  murmurs  were 
heard,  then  sighs.  Next,  sounds  reached 
my  ears  resembling  groanings  which 
oannot  be  uttered;  they  seemed  like  the 
suppressed  cries  of  men,  wrestling  in  an 
agony  of  prayer.  [N'ever,  while  I  live, 
can  I  forget  that  scene.  It  did  seem  that 
heaven  and  earth,  never  before  nor  since^ 
came  so  near  each  other.  It  did  seem 
that  our  young  friends  had  approached 
very,  very  near  to  a  throne  of  grace,  and 
were  almost  talking  and  counseling  face 


48  THE    TERRIBLE    STRUGGLE. 

to  face  with  our  Father  in  heaven.  1 
love  to  think  of  that  time  and  that  place. 
It  is  a  hallowed  place.  It  will  ever  he 
dear  to  memory.  I  had  all  along  acted 
for  the  revival  and  with  the  majority  of 
the  Presbytery,  because  I  felt  assured 
they  were  right.  Seeing  a  Commission 
of  venerable  and  good  men  arrayed  in 
opposition,  and  listening  to  their  solemn 
appeals,  I  thought  it  necessary  to  pray 
submissively,  and  inquire  solemnly  of  the 
Lord,  whether  we  all  might  not  have 
been  wrong.  I  was  glad  when  Mr.  Ew- 
ing  asked  this  privilege.  My  heart  was 
afflicted,  and  I  said,  ^IN'ow,  0  Lord,  lead 
me  and  guide  me.'  And  my  feeling 
truly  was,  '  Thy  will  be  done.'  I  did  not 
know  but  some,  or  even  all,  of  the  young 
men  might  submit.  My  prayer  was  that 
the  Lord  might  guide  them  to  this,  if  it 
was  according  to  his  holy  will.  I 
thought,  Hhe  Lord  reigns;'  and  then 
how  I  did  rejoice!     I  arose  strengthened 


THE    TERRIBLE    STRUGGLE.  49 

and  refreshed  from  my  knees,  saying,  '  O 
Lord  I  will  praise  thee :    though  thou 
wast  angry  with  us,  thine  anger  is  turned 
away,  and  thou  comfortedst  us.'     I  felt 
that   God   would  carry  on  his  glorious 
work   by   means   of   his   chosen  instru- 
ments, his  blessed  name  be  honored,  and 
precious    souls     saved;     and    this    was 
enough.     As  I  came  out  of  the  woods,  1 
saw  the  young  men  were  repairing  to  the 
house.      Mr.    Ewing   came    out    of    the 
thicket  near  my  path.     He  saw  me  not. 
With  head  erect,  his  eyes  were  fixed  on 
vacancy    or   cast   towards  heaven.     His 
hands  were  pressed  upon  his  bosom,  as 
if  to  hold  a  heart  from  breaking.     His 
<3heeks,  lately  so  blooming,  were  pale  as 
•death.     His  step  was  slow  but  firm;  and 
his  whole  air  and  manner  indicated  a  deci- 
sion and  energy  that  would  not  allow  him 
to  yield  to  the  injustice  of  men,  because  he 
feared  God.     I  saw  plainly  that  he  had 
settled  the  question  in  the  fear  of  God.'* 
4 


50  THE    TERRIBLE    STRUGGLE. 

When  the  youngs  men  returned  from 
the  grove,  the  Commission,  after  sol- 
emnly adjuring  them  "to  submit,"  put 
the  question  to  each  one  separately :  "Do 
you  submit,  or  not  submit''?  All  of 
them,  however,  most  positively  refused; 
and  gave  as  a  reason,  that  the  Cumber- 
land Presbytery  was  a  regular  Church 
judicatory,  and  competent  to  judge  of  the 
qualifications  of  its  ministers.  In  this 
position  they  were  certainly  correct,  and 
no  one  can  successfully  refute  it.  But 
strange  to  say,  in  defiance  of  all  law  and 
authority,  the  Commission  made  the 
following  decision :  "  The  Commission  of 
Synod  prohibit,  and  they  do  hereby  sol- 
emnly prohibit,  the  said  persons  from, 
exhorting,  preaching,  and  administering 
ordinances,  in  consequence  of  any 
authority  which  they  have  obtained  from 
the  Cumberland  Presbytery,  until  they 
submit  to  our  jurisdiction,  and  undergo- 
the  requisite  examination."     Before  the 


THE    TERRIBLE    STRUGGLE.  51 

OommissioD  adjotirned,  they  cited  several 
of  the  old  revival  ministers  to  appear  at 
the  next  meeting  of  Synod,  and  answer 
to  the  charge  of  heresy. 

For  eight  or  nine  days  this  Commis- 
sion was  in  session,  and  it  would,  per- 
haps, be  safe  to  say  that  never,  in  that 
space  of  time,  were  there  so  many  intol- 
erable blunders  committed  by  a  body  of 
men  claiming  to  be  followers  of  the  meek 
and  lowly  Saviour!  The  revival  minis- 
ters, however,  had  long  since  decided  the 
question  whether  it  was  ''  better  to  obey 
God  rather  than  man."  They,  therefore, 
resolved  that  they  would  continue  to 
preach  and  administer  the  ordinances  as 
they  had  done,  and  that  they  would  still 
encourage  and  defend  the  young  men 
whose  labors  God  had  so  signally  owned 
and  blessed.  To  render  the  work  more 
effective,  they  organized  themselves  into 
a  Council;  and,  to  show  that  the  people 
were   in   sympathy   with   them,    almost 


62  THE    TERRIBLE    STRUGGLE. 

every  congregation  within  the  bounds  of 
the  Cumberland  Presbytery  joined  the 
Council. 

The  Synod  met  in  October,  1806,  and 
Messrs.  Eankin  and  Hodge  were  sent  by 
the  Council  to  that  Synod  to  propose  a 
reconciliation.  But  the  Synod  endorsed 
the  action  of  the  Commission,  and  de- 
manded that  the  young  men  should 
submit  to  an  examination.  The  unrea- 
sonable demand,  however,  was  refused, 
and,  as  might  have  been  expected  from 
such  a  court,  Messrs. Rankin  and  Hodge 
were  suspended  from  the  ministry,  and 
the  Cumberland  Presbytery  was  dissolved 
— blotted  out  of  existence !  What  folly  1 
What  madness! 


THE    OLD    LOG    HOUSE.  53 


CHAPTER  y. 

THE    OLD    LOG    HOUSE. 

In  the  first  chapter  of  this  little  book 
the  promise  was  made  that  something 
more  should  be  told  about  the  Old  Log 
House;  and  this  is  the  time  and  place  to 
redeem  that  pledge. 

The  reader  will  not  forget  that  the 
great  and  good  men  Avho  belonged  to  the 
revival  party  were  treated  most  shame- 
fully by  those  Avho  were  opposed  to  it. 
Those  pure-minded,  noble-hearted  men, 
however,  had  been  taught  in  the  school 
of  Him  who,  when  he  was  reviled,  ''re- 
viled not  again;''  they,  therefore,  like 
Stephen,  when  his  enemies  maltreated 
him,  could  pray,  "Lord,  lay  not  this  sin 
to  their  char^^e." 


54  THE    OLD    LOG   HOUSE. 

Time  and  again  did  these  faithful  men 
of  God  do  all  in  their  power  to  bring 
about  a  reconciliation.  They  had  im- 
plored the  Synod  to  do  them  justice,  and 
had  even  sent  delegates  to  that  body  to 
plead  for  a  settlement  of  the  difficulty. 
The  Synod,  however,  had  turned  a  deaf 
ear  to  their  supplications,  and,  to  add 
insult  to  injury,  had  endorsed  the  unlaw- 
ful acts  of  the  Commission! 

The  revival  party  felt  that  there  was 
one  more  tribunal  to  which  they  could 
appeal.  They  therefore  addressed  a  let- 
ter to  the  General  Assembly  (the  highest 
court  in  the  Presbyterian  Church),  pray- 
ing for  interference  in  their  behalf;  but 
while  it  seemed  to  be  the  conviction  of  a 
majority  of  that  court  that  the  Synod 
had  violated  the  constitution  of  the 
Church,  yet,  strange  to  say,  the  General 
Assembly  declined  to  decide  the  case, 
because  it  had  not  come  before  that  body 
by  a  regular  appeal  from  Synod !     Being 


THE    OLD    LOU    HOUSE.  55 

still  anxious  to  have  the  difficulty  settled, 
another  petition  was  sent  to  the  General 
Assembly  by  the  Council  in  the  spring 
of  1808,  but  the  General  Assembly  re- 
plied that  no  relief  could  be  given !  The 
next  year  the  General  Assembly  sustained 
the  action  of  the  Synod,  and  said  "that 
the  Synod  deserved  the  thanks  of  the 
Church  for  the  firmness  and  zeal  with 
which  they  had  acted  in  the  trying  cir-, 
cumstances  in  which  they  had  been 
placed!"  The  revival  party,  however,  * 
determined  to  make  one  more  eftbrt. 
They,  therefore,  appointed  two  Commis- 
sioners to  visit  the  Synod  and  propose 
terms  of  peace  and  reconciliation.  The 
proposition  which  they  submitted  was 
as  follows:  "The  revival  party  would 
submit  to  an  examination  on  the  tenets 
of  our  holy  religion  by  the  Synod,  by 
the  Transylvania  Presbyter}^,  or  by  a 
committee  appointed  for  the  purpose, 
with  the  understanding  that  they  should 


56  THE    OLD    LOG    HOUSE. 

be  received  or  rejected  as  a  connected 
body ;  that,  if  required,  they  would  adopt 
the  Confession  of  Faith,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  fatality  only."  But  this  proposi- 
tion was  rejected  by  the  Synod.  This 
was  the  last  effort  that  was  made  to  effect 
a  reconciliation ;  nor  could  anything  else 
have  been  done  without  compromising 
the  self-respect  of  the  revival  party. 
These  noble  men,  then,  were  compelled 
to  either  abandon  the  good  work  of  God, 
or  constitute  a  new  Presbytery,  separate 
and  distinct  from  the  Synod  of  Kentucky. 
They  chose  to  do  the  latter,  and  for  so 
doing  they  were  willing  to  be  judged,  not 
only  by  the  great  God  whom  they  served, 
but  by  generations  then  unborn. 

On  the  3rd  day  of  February,  1810, 
therefore.  Finis  Ewing  and  Samuel  King, 
in  company  with  Ephraim  McLean,  who 
was  then  only  a  licentiate,  went  to  the 
residence  of  Samuel  McAdow,  and  pro- 
posed to  him  the  propriety  of  constitut- 


THE    OLD    LOG    HOUSE.  57 

ii]g  a  new  Presbytery.  Mr.  McAdow 
said  that  it  was  a  very  important  matter, 
and  tliat  he  must  have  time  for  reflection 
and  prayer.  He  accordingly  went  to  the 
secret  grove,  and  there  in  earnest,  im- 
portunate prayer  until  midnight,  sought 
for  divine  guidance.  When  he  arose 
from  his  sleepless  couch  early  the  next 
morning,  he  w^as  still  undecided.  He 
therefore  went  again  to  his  place  of  secret 
devotion,  and  while  upon  his  bended 
knees  in  earnest  supplication,  God's  good 
Spirit  enabled  him  to  decide  what  lie 
should  do.  At  once  he  arose  and  re- 
turned to  the  house,  sajnng  to  his  breth- 
ren, ''  God  has  answered  the  doubtful 
question,  and  I  am  now  ready  to  consti- 
tute, and  to  ordain  this  young  brothei 
(McLean)  before  we  adjourn."  A  Pres- 
bytery was  then  and  there  constituted, 
which  was  called  the  Cumberland  Pres- 
bytery. 

This  important  event  occurred  on  the 


68  THE    OLD    LOG   HOUSE. 

4th  day  of  February,  1810,  in  the  county 
of  Dickson,  State  of  Tennessee,  and  in 
the  Old  Log  House  which  was  the  home 
of  Sanauel  McAdow,  as  stated  in  a  pre- 
vious chapter.  The  following  is  an  exact 
copy  of  the  record  made  by  those  three 
faithful  men  of  God  in  the  solemn  act 
of  constituting  the  Cumberland  Presby- 
tery: "In  Dickson  county,  Tennessee 
State,  at  the  Rev.  Samuel  McAdow's, 
this  fourth  day  of  February,  1810:  we, 
Samuel  McAdow,  Finis  Ewing,  and 
Samuel  King,  regularly  ordained  minis- 
ters in  the  Presbyterian  Church,  against 
whom  no  charge  either  of  immorality  or 
heresy  has  ever  been  exhibited  before 
any  of  the  Church  judicatures,  having 
waited  in  vain  more  than  four  years;  in 
the  meantime  petitioning  the  General 
Assembly  for  a  redress  of  grievances  and 
a  restoration  of  violated  rights,  have  con- 
stituted, and  do  hereby  agree  and  deter- 
mine  to   constitute   into   a   Presbytery, 


THE    OLD    LOG    HOUSE.  59 

kEown  by  the  name  of  the  Cumberland 
Presbytery." 

Immediately  after  constituting  the 
Presbytery,  Ephraim  McLean  was  or- 
-daiued,  or  set  apart  to  the  whole  work 
of  the  ministry.  Mr.  Ewing,  in  a  letter 
to  a  friend  afterwards,  thus  speaks  of  the 
constitution  of  the  Presbytery  and  of  its 
action:  "During  the  preceding  transac- 
tions," says  he,  "I  felt  an  indescribable 
^we,  solemnity,  and  even  timidity.  My 
judgment  was  clear  that  it  was  a  duty  to 
constitute  a  Presbytery,  but  I  feared  that 
[  had  no  immediate,  special,  and  over- 
powering evidence  direct  from  God  that 
we  were  about  to  do  right.  But  being 
appointed  to  preside  in  the  ordination, 
it  became  my  duty  to  pray.  I  distinctly 
recollect  that,  with  one  hand  upon  the 
head  of  the  preacher  and  the  other  lifted 
to  heaven,  the  first  sentence  I  uttered 
the  immediate  presence  and  power  of 
Ood  were  most  sensibly  felt  by  me,  and, 


60  THE    OLD    LOG    HOUSE. 

I  believe,  by  all  engaged  in  the  transac- 
tion; and  siicli  were  my  feelings  that 
every  doubt  concerning  the  propriety  of 
what  we  had  done  was  entirely  banished.'^ 
From  the  foregoing,  it  will  be  seen  that 
we  have  found  the  origin  of  the  Cum- 
berland Presbyterian  Church.  It  is  true^ 
it  had  an  humble  birth-place — an  old  log 
house- — but  it  is  not  the  only  great,  thing 
that  was  born  in  obscurity.  The  first 
Church  ever  organized  in  the  world's  his- 
tory, had  its  origin  in  the  family  of  Abra- 
ham ;  and  the  Bible  tells  us  that  he  dwelt 
in  a  tent — did  not  have  even  a  house  of 
logs!  Jesus  Christ,  the  blessed  Saviour 
of  the  world,  was  born  in  a  stable.  He,. 
congequently,  made  his  advent  among  the- 
lov/ly  and  the  despised.  When,  there- 
fore, the  time  came  for  him  to  select  those- 
whom  he  would  send  forth  as  the  apos- 
tles of  his  blessed  religion,  he  went,  not 
to  the  mansions  of  the  great  nor  to  the 
palaces   of    kings,    but   to   the   humble 


THE    OLD    LOG   HOUSE.  61 

walks  of  life,  and  chose  from  the  poor  of 
this  world  those  who  were  destined,  like 
their  divine  Master,  to  be  despised  and 
rejected  of  men — chose  the  lowly  but 
zealous  fishermen  of  Galilee,  who  would 
be  content  to- lay  every  laurel  at  the  foot 
of  the  cross,  and  to  "count  all  things 
but  loss  for  the  excellency  of  the  knowl- 
edge of  Christ  Jesus  their  Lord."  When, 
too,  the  time  came  to  institute  the  sac- 
r^nent  of  the  Supper,  he  directed  his 
apostles  to  go,  not  to  some  splendid  hall 
in  the  great  city  of  Jerusalem,  but  to 
^'  an  upper  room." 

It  has  ever  been  God's  plan  to  choose 
what  seemed  to  the  world  the  feeblest 
instruments  to  accomplish  the  greatest 
results.  When  he  would  select  a  great 
law-giver,  he  went  to  the  ark  of  bulrushes 
that  was  quietly  floating  upon  the  river 
Nile,  and  rescued  from  a  watery  grave 
the  little  child  Moses.  When  a  king  was 
to  be  chosen  for  the  great  Jewish  nation, 


62  THE   OLD   LOG   HOUSE. 

he  directed  his  priest  to  pour  the  anoint* 
ing  oil  upon  the  least,  the  youngest  son 
of  Jesse.  When  the  Church  was  scat- 
tered throughout  the  hundred  and  twenty 
and  seven  provinces  of  Persia,  he  chose 
an  obscure  daughter  of  the  captivity  to 
serve  his  people;  and  in  a  short  time 
the  palace  of  Shushan  and  the  gorgeous 
court  of  the  Shah  were  made  to  stand  in 
awe  of  Esther's  God.  When  he  would 
proclaim  his  name  and  his  rightful 
claims  to  sovereignty  from  the  highest 
battlements  of  earthly  power,  he  sent 
a  youth  of  nineteen  years  to  the  great 
city  of  Babylon,  and  there,  by  the  power 
and  influence  of  a  holy  life,  the  king  and 
the  court,  the  nobles  and  the  people,  pub- 
licly acknowledged  the  God  of  Daniel, 
and  "blessed  the  Most  High,  and  praised 
and  honored  him  that  liveth  forever, 
whose  dominion  is  an  everlasting  do- 
minion, and  his  kingdom  is  from  genera- 
tion to  generation."      The  reason  why 


THE    OLD    LOG   HOUSE.  63 

the  mighty  Jehovah  thus  acts  is  given  by 
the  great  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles  in  the 
following  words:  "Because  the  foolish- 
ness of  God  is  wiser  than  men ;  and  the 
weakness  of  God  is  stronger  than  men." 
Before  closing  this  chapter,  it  can  with 
propriety  be  said  that  no  Church  on 
earth  can  boast  of  a  purer  body  of  men 
as  its  founders  than  the  Cumberland 
Presbyterian  Church.  King,  Ewing, 
and  McAdow,  the  men  who  organized 
it,  were  men  of  unblemished  reputation. 
It  is  true,  they  were  persecuted  and 
traduced,  but  the  most  bitter  enemies 
that  assailed  them  could  not  say  aught 
against  their  moral  character  and  Chris- 
tian integrity.  The  same  cannot  be  said, 
as  will  be  seen  after  awhile,  of  all  the 
founders  of  all  the  other  Christian 
Churches.  What  a  legacy,  in  this  respect, 
then,  has  been  left  to  those  who  are 
members  of  the  Cumberland  Presbyte- 
rian Church! 


64  THE   TWO    ITEMS 


CHAPTER  YI. 

THE    TWO    ITEMS. 

As  was  stated  in  a  former  chapter,  the 
raen  who  afterwards  became  the  founders 
of  the  Cumberland  Presbyterian  Church, 
did  not  believe  in  the  doctrine  of  fatality, 
nor  did  they  think  it  wrong  or  sinful  for 
a  man  to  preach  the  gospel  simply  be- 
cause he  may  not  have  been  thoroughly 
educated  in  some  great  institution  of 
learning.  The  Confession  of  Faith  of 
the  Presbyterian  Church — the  denomi- 
'nation  which  the  founders  of  the  Cum- 
berland Presbyterian  Church  left — most 
clearly  and  unmistakably  teaches  the 
doctrine  oi'  fatality;  and  it  also  teaches 
that  no  man  should  be  allowed  to  preach 
the  gospel  unless  he  is  highly  educated. 


THE   TWO   ITEMS.  65 

To  satisfy  the  reader,  then,  that  these 
things  are  so,  the  two  items  will  now  be 
presented  from  the  Confession  of  Faith 
of  the  Presbyterian  Church — the  highest 
authority  of  that  denomination. 

First — Fatality.  By  fatality  is  meant 
that  God  created  a  certain  part  of  the 
human  family  to  be  saved,  and  a  certain 
part  to  be  lost;  that  is,  he  predestinated 
some  to  everlasting  life,  and  fore- 
ordained others  to  everlasting  death; 
and  that  this  was  done  "before  the  foun- 
dation of  the  world  was  laid" — before 
the  persons  themselves  were  created. 
And  yet,  worse  than  all,  we  are  told  that 
God  did  this  without  any  regard  to  the 
actions  of  those  whom  he  would  save  or 
damn !  Is  not  this  enough  to  make  us 
shudder? 

l^ow  for  the  proof.  In  the  third 
chapter  of  the  Presbyterian  Confes- 
sion of  Faith,  we  have  the  following 
language:  "By  the  decree  of  God,  for 
5 


66  THE   TWO   ITEMS. 

the  manifestation  of  Ms  glory,  some  men 
and  angels  are  predestinated  unto  ever- 
lasting life,  and  others  fore-ordained  to 
everlasting  death.  Those  of  mankind 
that  are  predestinated  unto  life,  God,  be- 
fore the  foundation  of  the  world  was 
laid,  according  to  his  eternal  and  immu- 
table purpose,  and  the  secret  counsel  and 
good  pleasure  of  his  will,  hath  chosen 
in  Christ  unto  everlasting  glory,  out  of 
his  mere  free  grace  and  love,  without  any 
foresight  of  faith  or  good  works,  or  per- 
severance in  either  of  them,  or  any  othe«r 
thing  in  the  creature,  as  conditions  or 
causes  moving  him  thereunto,  and  all  to 
the  praise  of  his  glorious  grace.  The 
rest  of  mankind,  God  was  pleased, 
according  to  the  unsearchable  counsel 
of  his  own  will,  whereby  he  extendeth 
or  withholdeth  mercy  as  he  pleaseth, 
for  the  glory  of  his  sovereign  power 
over  his  creatures,  to  pass  by,  and 
to  ordain  them  to  dishonor  and  wrath 


THE   TWO   ITEMS.  67 

for  their  sin,  to  the  praise  of  his  glorious 
justice." 

^ow,  if  the  foregoing  does  not  teach 
the  doctrine  of  fatality^  then  words  have 
no  meaning.  Let,  then,  the  reader  go 
back  and  look  closely  at  the  language 
which  has  been  copied,  and  see  how 
clearly  the  idea  is  set  forth,  that  God  de- 
termined, from  before  the  foundation  of 
the  world,  to  save  some,  and  to  damn 
others,  without  regard  to  anything  that 
they  might  do.  What  a  sentiment!  J^o 
wonder  that  the  good  men  connected 
with  that  great  revival  which  has  been 
described,  objected  to  the  doctrine  of 
"fatality" — refused  to  believe  it  and  to 
preach  it.  How  could  they  believe  such 
a  sentiment  when  the  Bible  so  clearly 
teaches  to  the  contrary?  Hear  what 
Crod  himself  says:  "Whosoever  will, 
let  him  take  the  water  of  life  freely." 
*'Come  unto  me  all  ye  that  labor  and  are 
heavy  laden,  and  I  will  give  you   rest." 


68  THE    TWO   ITEMS. 

The  Scriptures  likewise  tell  us  that 
Christ,  "by  the  grace  of  God,  tasted 
death  for  every  man."  Also,  that  he 
*'gave  himself  a  ransom  for  all  to  be  tes- 
tified in  due  time."  A  great  many  other 
passages  of  this  kind  might  be  pre- 
sented, but  this  is  not  the  place  to  multi- 
ply them.  Surely  these  are  sufficient  to 
prove  that  the  doctrine  of  "fatality,"  a& 
it  is  called,  is  not  sustained  by  the  Word 
of  God. 

Second — Education.  In  Chapter  XIY.^ 
Form  of  Government,  in  the  Confession 
of  Faith  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,, 
we  have  the  following  language  in  refer- 
ence to  the  qualifications  which  a  minis- 
ter must  possess  before  he  is  licensed  to 
preach:  "And  it  is  recommended  that 
the  candidate  be  also  required  to  produce 
a  diploma  of  Bachelor  or  Master  of  Arts^ 
from  some  college  or  university;  or  at 
least  some  authentic  testimonials  of  his 
having  gone  through  a  regular  course  of 


THE    TWO   ITEMS.  69 

learning.  Because  it  is  highly  reproach- 
ful to  religion,  and  dangerous  to  the 
Church,  to  entrust  tbe  holy  ministry  to 
weak  and  ignorant  men,  the  Presbytery 
shall  try  each  candidate  as  to  his  knowl- 
edge of  the  Latin  language,  and  the 
original  language  in  which  the  Holy 
Scriptures  were  written.  They  shall  also 
examine  him  on  the  arts  and  sciences; 
on  theology,  natural  and  revealed,  and 
on  ecclesiastical  history,  the  sacraments, 
and  Church  government.  And  in  order 
to  make  trial  of  his  talents  to  explain 
and  vindicate,  and  practically  to  enforce, 
the  doctrines  of  the  gospel,  the  Presby- 
tery shall  require  of  him :  1.  A  Latin 
exegesis  on  some  common  head  in  di- 
vinity. 2.  A  critical  exercise;  in  which 
the  candidate  shall  give  a  specimen  of 
his  taste  and  judgment  in  sacred  criti- 
cism; presenting  an  explication  of  the 
original  text,  stating  its  connection, 
illustrating  its  forte  and  heauties,  remov- 


70  THE    TWO   ITEMS. 

ing  its  difficulties,  and  solving  any  im- 
portant questions  which  it  may  present. 
3.  A  lecture  or  exposition  of  several 
verses  of  Scripture.  4.  A  popular 
sermon." 

The  same  book,  in  the  same  chapter, 
also  says:  "That  the  most  effectual 
measures  may  be  taken  to  guard  against 
the  admission  of  inefficient  men  into  the 
sacred  office,  it  is  recommended  that  no 
candidate,  except  in  extraordinary  cases, 
be  licensed,  unless,  after  his  having  com- 
pleted the  usual  course  of  academical 
studies,  he  shall  have  studied  divinity  at 
least  two  years,  under  some  approved  di- 
vine, or  professor  of  theology." 

The  foregoing  is  certainly  sufficient  to 
convince  any  one  that  the  Presbyterian 
Church  holds  to  the  position  that  no  man 
should  preach  the  gospel  unless  he  is 
most  thoroughly  educated — must  under- 
stand the  arts  and  sciences,  the  original 
languages   (Latin,  Greek,  and  Hebrew), 


THE    TWO    ITEMS.  71 

and  must  likewise,  in  addition  to  hav- 
ing mastered  all  these,  spend  two  years 
in  a  theological  school ! 

^ow,  those  great  and  good  men  who 
were  instrumental  in  founding  the  Cum- 
berland Presbyterian  Church,  were  not 
opposed  to  education,  nor  to  a  thorough 
education  either;  but  they  did  not  adopt 
the  extreme  views  of  the  Presbyterian 
Confession  of  Faith  on  this  subject. 
The}^,  therefore,  in  view  of  the  great 
need  of  "the  Cumberland  Country"  for 
ministerial  help,  determined  to  license 
men  to  preach  the  gospel  who  had  not 
been  as  thoroughly  educated  as  the  Con- 
fession of  Faith  required.  In  taking  this 
position,  they,  as  has  been  seen,  had  God's 
approval,  for  he  owned  and  blessed  the 
labors  of  those  men — placed  the  seal  of 
his  approbation  upon  their  ministry. 
Kor  was  this  the  first  time  in  the  history 
of  the  Presbyterian  Church  that  men 
were  inducted  into  tlie  ininistrv  who  re- 


72  THE   TWO   ITEMS. 

fused  to  adopt  all  the  doctrines  and  sen- 
timents taught  in  the  Confession  of 
Faith.  The  Presbytery  in  I^orth  Caro- 
lina, we  are  told,  permitted  some  of  its 
members  to  make  similar  exceptions  to 
those  made  by  the  men  who  afterwards 
became  the  founders  of  the  Cumberland 
Presbyterian  Church.  It  is  also  a  fact 
of  history,  that  Revs.  Messrs.  Stone  and 
Kelson,  of  Kentucky,  and  a  number  of 
others,  were  ordained  with  the  same  "  ex- 
ceptions"; and  this  was  done,  too,  pre- 
vious to  the  time  now  under  considera- 
tion. The  truth  is,  the  Confession  of 
Faith  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  was 
not  adopted  in  tlie  United  States  until 
the  year  1729;  and  in  the  Adopting  Act, 
we  find  the  following  language  in  the 
records  of  the  Synod  of  Philadelphia: 
*' And  in  case  any  minister  of  this  Synod, 
or  any  candidate  for  the  ministry,  shall 
have  any  scruple  with  respect  to  any  ar- 
ticle   or  articles   of   said    Confession   of 


THE   TWO   ITEMS.  73 

Faith  or  Catechism,  he  shall  at  the  time 
of  making  such  declaration,  declare  his 
sentiments  to  the  Presbytery  or  Synod, 
who  shall,  notwithstanding,  admit  him 
to  the  exercise   of  the  ministry  within 
our  bounds,  and  to  ministerial  commis- 
sion, if  either  Synod  or  Presbytery  shall 
judge  his  scruple  or  mistake  to  be  only 
about  articles  not  essential  and  necessary 
in  doctrine,  worship,  and  government." 
As   additional  proof,  we  quote  from 
President  Davies,  one  of  the  most  promi- 
nent    ministers     in     the     Presbyterian 
Ohurch.     He  visited   England  in  1753, 
and  was  interrogated  on  the  subject  of 
ordaining  men  who  made  "  exceptions  to 
the  Confession  of  Faith."     His  answer 
was:     "We   allowed    the   candidate    to 
mention  his  objection  to  any  article  in 
the     Confession,    and    the    judicatories 
to  judge  whether  the  articles  objected 
against  were  essential   to   Christianity; 
and  if  they  judged  they  were  not,  they 


74  THE   TWO   ITEMS. 

would  admit  the  candidate,  notwitli- 
standing  his  objections."  Mr.  Wood^ 
another  minister  of  prominence  in  that 
Church,  quotes  what  Mr.  Davies  says^ 
and  then  uses  the  following  language: 
*'It  will  be  remembered  that  this  wa& 
the  principle  upon  which  the  American 
Presbyterian  Church  was  founded — this 
was  the  spirit  of  the  Adopting  Act  of 
1729." 

From  the  foregoing,  then,  it  will  be 
seen  that  it  was  quite  common  in  the 
early  history  of  the  Presbyterian  Church 
in  the  United  States  to  license  and  or- 
dain men  who  made  "  exceptions  "  to  the 
Confession  of  Faith,  provided  these  "  ex- 
ceptions" were  not  considered  "es- 
sential and  necessary  articles  of  faith." 
Why,  then,  abuse  the  Cumberland  Pres^ 
bytery  for  doing  the  same  thing?  As- 
was  stated  before,  the  country  was  sadly 
in  need  of  earnest,  consecrated  ministers. 
The  unconverted  "were  groaning  for  re- 


THE   TWO   ITEMS.  75 

demption  in  the  blood  of  the  Lamb,  and 
the  little  flocks  scattered  through  the 
wilderness  were  without  the  care  of 
faithful  shepherds.  How,  then,  could  the 
friends  of  God  and  humanity  behave 
themselves  as  did  the  anti-revival  party? 
How  could  they  find  it  in  their  hearts  to 
oppose  the  great  revival  because  some, 
like  the  good  Samaritan,  "with  a  loud 
voice  glorified  God,  and  fell  down  at 
Jesus'  feet,  giving  thanks";  and  others, 
like  the  blind  Bartimeus,  "cried  out, 
Jesus,  thou  son  of  David,  have  mercy  on 
me"? 

Many,  we  are  sorry  to  say,  have  la- 
bored hard  to  make  the  impression  that 
the  only  reason  why  the  Cumberland 
Presbyterian  Church  was  brought  into 
existence  was,  that  its  founders  were  op- 
posed to  an  educated  ministry.  The  as- 
sertion is  utterly  false,  as  the  facts  of 
history  will  prove.  Mr.  Davidson,  the 
uncandid    and    unfair   historian    of    the 


76  THE   TWO    ITEMS. 

Presbyterian  Church,  when  he  comeb  to 
that  point,  is  obliged  to  admit  that  it 
was  not  the  want  of  classical  learni  \g 
that  produced  the  difficulty.  On  page 
256  of  his  history,  he  uses  the  following 
language:  "Calvinism  is  a  complete  and 
compact  system,  and,  as  in  a  well- 
constructed  arch,  every  separate  doctrine 
is  a  keystone,  which  cannot  be  abstrac^.ed 
without  endangering  the  whole.  As 
from  a  foot  we  may  infer  the  proporti  >ns 
of  a  statue,  or  reproduce  a  Saurian  fiom 
its  fossil  fragments,  so  each  single  doc- 
trine of  the  Calvinistic  scheme  naturally 
and  necessarily  involves  the  adoption  of 
all  the  rest.  Forgetful  or  unconscious  of 
this  truth,  they  (the  Cumberland  Presby- 
terians) endeavored,  in  the  altered  edition 
of  the  Confession  and  Catechisms,  to 
steer  a  middle  course  between  Calvinism 
and  Arminianism  (if  a  middle  course 
there  can  be),  rejecting  the  doctrines  of 
eternal  reprobation,  limited  atonement, 


THE   TWO   ITEMS.  77 

and  special  grace,  and  maintaining  that 
the  Spirit  of  God  operates  on  the  world, 
or  co-extensively  with  the  atonement,  so 
as  to  leave  all  men  inexcusable." 

As  additional  proof  upon  this  subject, 
the  reader  is  referred  to  "  The  Assembly's 
Digest" — a  book  published  by  the  Pres- 
byterian Church.  On  page  629,  we 
have  the  following:  "They  hold  doc- 
trines contrary  to  those  contained  in 
our  Confession  of  Faith,  viz.:  That 
they  in  effect  deny  election,  and  hold  that 
there  is  a  certain  sufficiency  of  grace 
given  to  every  man,  which  if  he  will 
improve,  he  shall  obtain  more,  etc.,  until 
he  arrive  at  true  conversion."  Also  on 
page  633,  we  have  the  following :  "  The 
grounds  of  their  separation  from  us 
were,  that  we  would  not  relax  our  dis- 
cipline, and  surrender  some  important 
doctrines  of  our  Confession  of  Faith." 

In  addition  to  the  foregoing,  the  at- 
tention of  the  reader  is  called  to  the  fact 


78  THE    TWO   ITEMS. 

that,  in  1866,  an  effort  was  made  on  the 
subject  of  Organic  Union  between  the 
Presbyterian  Church  in  the  United  States 
(the  Presbyterian  Church,  South),  and 
the  Cumberland  Presbyterian  Church. 
Able  Committees  were  appointed  by  the 
General  Assembly  of  each  Church;  and 
when  they  met  in  the  city  of  Memphis, 
Tennessee,  the  Committee  on  the  part  of 
the  Cumberland  Presbyterian  Church 
proposed  that  it  would  agree  to  adopt 
the  "standard"  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church  on  the  subject  of  the  educa- 
tion of  the  ministry,  provided,  that  that 
Church  would  so  modify  its  Confession 
of  Faith  as  to  remove  therefrom  the  idea 
of  unconditional  election  and  reproba- 
tion. The  Committee  from  that  Church 
did  not  accept  the  proposition,  but 
agreed  to  refer  the  matter  to  the  General 
Assembly  of  that  Church.  In  1867,  in 
the  city  of  JSTashville,  Tennessee,  that 
General  Assembly  refused  to  accede  to 


THE   TWO   ITEMS.  79 

the  proposition  made  by  the  Committee 
from  the  Cumberland  Presbyterian 
Church,  and  said,  "the  time  had  not  yet 
come  to  change  the  time-honored  Stand- 
ards which  have  been  for  so  many  years 
the  glory  of  the  Presbyterian  Church." 

The  same  thing  in  substance  occurred 
when,  in  1874,  two  similar  Committees 
met  with  a  view  to  Organic  Union  be- 
tween the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the 
United  States  of  America  (the  Presbyte- 
rian Church,  Korth),  and  the  Cumber- 
land Presbyterian  Church.  Those  Com- 
mittees met  in  iTashville,  Tennessee,  and 
remained  in  session  several  days;  but  no 
promise  whatever  could  be  extorted  from 
the  Committee  on  the  part  of  that 
Church,  that  the  doctrines  of  its  Confes- 
sion of  Faith  would  be  in  the  least  mod- 
ified on  the  points  mentioned  in  the 
other  case — unconditional  election  and 
reprobation. 

From  the  foregoing  we  see  how  utterly 


80  THE   TWO   ITEMS. 

untrue  the  charge  that  the  only  cause  of 
the  organization  of  the  Cumberland 
Presbyterian  Church  was  opposition  to 
an  educated  ministry.  Let  it  be  remem- 
bered, too,  that  the  items  of  history 
which  have  just  been  quoted,  come 
from  members  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church — and  the  first  three,  from 
those  who  were  bitter  enemies  of 
the  Church  organized  in  the  Old  Log 
House  by  King,  Ewing,  and  McAdow. 
The  reader  must  not  forget,  however, 
that  the  founders  of  the  Cumberland 
Presbyterian  Church  were  not  opposed 
to  education,  nor  to  an  educated  minis- 
try ;  but  they  did  believe — and  for  this 
belief  they  have  the  Bible  and  reason  on 
their  side — that  a  man  may  preach  the 
gospel  without  having  received  "a  di- 
ploma of  Bachelor  or  Master  of  Arts 
from  some  college  or  university";  and 
that  after  having  completed  such  a 
course,   "he  shall  have  studied  divinity 


THE  TWO  ITEMS.  81 

at  least  two  years,  under  some  approved 
divine  or  professor  of  theology."  But 
as  these  two  items — "fatality  and  educa- 
tion"— will  come  up  again  for  consid- 
eration before  this  little  book  is  com- 
pleted, they  are  dismissed  for  the  present. 
The  Cumberland  Presbyterian  Church, 
as  has  been  seen,  was  brought  into  exist- 
ence. The  great  question  is,  Did  the 
founders  of  that  denomination  do  right 
in  organizing  a  new  one?  Why  did  they 
not  join  some  Church  that  was  already 
ill  existence?  If  the  reader  will  be  pa- 
tient, the  reason  shall  be  given  in  the 
chapters  which  follow ;  for  the  leading 
denominations  of  the  world  will  now  be 
taken  up  one  by  one,  and  the  objectiona- 
ble features  to  each  will  be  presented. 
In  doing  this,  the  reader  will  find  that, 
if  I  have  "nothing  extenuated,"  neither 
have  I  "  set  down  aught  in  malice."  The 
emphasis  with  which  utterances  are  made 
must  not  be  construed  as  unkindness  to 
6 


82  THE   TWO   ITEMS. 

any  one  or  to  any  Church,  for  such  a 
feeling  does  not  exist.  It  is  with  sys- 
tems of  doctrine,  and  not  with  persons, 
that  we  have  to  do  in  this  work,  and  we 
wish  the  matter  so  understood  by  all 
who  read  this  book,  and,  also,  by  all  the 
members  of  the  different  denominations 
whose  Creeds  are  criticised. 


THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH.    83 


CHAPTER  YII. 

THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH. 

'One  of  the  oldest  Chiirclies  in  existence 
is  the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  Why, 
then,  it  may  be  asked,  did  not  the  found- 
ers of  the  Cumberland  Presbyterian 
Church  join  that  organization? 

I. — ITS    ORIGIN. 

The  friends  of  this  denomination  say 
that  it  is  the  Church  which  the  Saviour 
himself  established  when  he  was  upon 
earth,  but  there  is  no  truth  in  this  asser- 
tion. The  following  is  a  brief  but  accu- 
rate statement  in  regard  to  its  origin. 
For  a  considerable  time  after  the  com- 
mencement of  the  Christian  era,  the. city 
of  Rome  was  ruled  by  Pagan  emperors, 
but  in  the  fourth  century,   Christianity 


84    THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH. 

became  the  religion  of  tlie  Common- 
weal tli  under  Constantine  the  Great. 
Soon  after  this  event  the  Empire  was 
rent  in  twain — one  part,  the  Eastern, 
with  the  city  of  Constantinople  as  its 
capital;  the  other  part,  the  Western, 
with  Rome  as  its  capital.  Wicked  rival- 
ries soon  sprang  up  between  the  prom- 
inent ministers  of  these  two  great  cities, 
and  the  question  was,  "Who  shall  be 
first  in  the  kingdom  of  God?"  An  em- 
peror by  the  name  of  Mauritius  made 
one  of  the  ministers  of  Constantinople 
universal  bishop — made  him  the  head 
and  ruler  of  the  whole  Church.  In  a 
short  time,  however,  this  emperor  was 
put  to  death  by  Phocas,  who  afterwards 
became  emperor.  One  of  the  first  things 
which  this  sovereign  did  was  to  move 
the  seat  of  government  of  the  Empire 
from  Constantinople  to  Rome ;  and,  hav- 
ing done  this,  he  conferred  the  title  of 
Universal  Bishop  on  Boniface  ITT.     This 


THE    ROMAN    CATHOLIC    CHURCH.  85 

occurred  A.  D.  607,  and  this  is  the  date 
of  Papal  supremacy — the  true  origin  of 
the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  What  a 
wicked  l)eginning!  An  emperor  who 
was  guilty  of  murder  was  the  one  who 
appointed  the  first  Bishop ! 

II. — THE    SUPREMACY    OF    THE    POPE. 

It  is  claimed  that  Peter,  who  was  one 
of  the  apostles  of  the  blessed  Saviour, 
was  the  supreme  head  of  Christ's  Church 
upon  earth,  and  that  the  Pope  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church  is  his  successor. 
This  assertion  is  utterly  untrue — has  no 
foundation  in  the  word  of  God. 

The  following  are  the  passages  of 
Scripture  which  are  relied  upon  to  prove 
the  doctrine :  "  I  say  unto  thee.  That  thou 
art  Peter,  and  upon  this  rock  I  will  build 
my  Church;  and  the  gates  of  hell  shall 
not  prevail  against  it.  And  I  will  give 
unto  thee  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven ;  and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  bind 


86    THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH. 

on  earth  shall  be  bound  in  heaven ;  and 
whatsoever  thou  shalt  loose  on  earth 
shall  be  loosed  in  heaven." — Matt.  xvi. 
18,  19. 

Roman  Catholics  tell  us  that  Peter  is 
the  rock  upon  which  the  Church  is  built. 
Christ,  however,  did  not  say  that  upon 
Peter  he  would  huild  his  Church,  but  upon 
the  confession  which  Peter  had  made  that 
he,  the  Saviour,  was  "the  Christ,  the  Son 
of  the  living  God."  l^or  did  Peter  so 
understand  it,  for  he  evidently  considered 
Christ  as  the  rock  upon  which  the  Church 
is  founded.  In  addressing  the  Sanhe- 
drim, he  says.  "This  is  the  stone" 
(speaking  of  Christ)  "  which  was  set  at 
naught  of  you  builders,  which  is  become 
the  head  of  the  corner." — Acts  iv.  11. 
And  in  the  second  chapter  of  his  first 
Epistle,  he  thus  speaks  of  Christ:  "If 
80  be  ye  have  tasted  that  the  Lord  is 
gracious.  To  whom  coming,  as  unto  a 
living  stone,  disallowed  indeed  of  meny 


THE    ROMAN    CATHOLIC    CIirRCII.  87 

but  chosen  of  God, and  precious,  yc  also, 
as  lively  stones,  are  built  np  a  spiritual 
house,  an  holy  priesthood,  to  offer  up 
spiritual  sacrifices,  acceptable  to  God  by 
Jesus  Christ.  Wherefore  also  it  is  con- 
tained in  the  Scripture,  behold,  I  lay  in 
Sion  a  chief  corner  stone,  elect,  precious  : 
and  he  that  believeth  on  him  shall  not 
be  confounded."  Surely  the  testimou}^ 
of  Peter  ought  to  be  sufficient  upon  this 
subject.  But  we  have  additional  evi- 
dence from  the  Bible.  "Other  founda- 
tion can  no  man  lay  than  that  is  laid, 
which  is  Jesus  Christ,"  etc.,  etc. 

It  is  true  that  Christ  said  to  Peter, 
"Whatsoever  thou  shalt  bind  on  earth 
fehall  be  bound  in  heaven,"  etc.,  but  he 
said  the  same  to  all  the  other  apostles. 
See  Matt,  xviii.  18:  "Verily  I  say  unto 
you  (not  unto  thee).  Whatsoever  ye  shall 
bind  on  earth  shall  be  bound  in  heaven; 
and  whatsoever  ye  shall  loose  on  earth 
6h~^all  be  loosed  in  heaven."     See  lilcewise 


88    THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH. 

John  XX.  21-23:  "Then  said  Jesus  to 
them  (to  all  the  apostles)  again,  Peace 
be  unto  you  :  as  my  Father  hath  sent  me, 
even  so  send  I  you.  And  when  he  had 
said  this,  he  breathed  on  them,  and  saitb 
unto  them, Receive  ye  the  Holy  Ghost: 
whose  soever  sins  ye  remit,  they  are  re- 
mitted unto  them;  and  whose  soever 
sins  ye  retain,  they  are  retained."  Was 
not  then  the  same  power  given  to  all  the 
other  apostles  that  was  given  to  Peter? 
Why,  most  assuredly.  Then  away  with 
the  doctrine  that  Peter  was  the  prince  or 
chief  or  Bishop  or  Pope  of  the  apostles! 

But  let  us  look  a  little  further  into  this 
matter.  Did  Peter,  after  the  resurrection 
and  ascension  of  Christ,  exercise  suprem- 
acy over  the  other  apostles?  IN'o,  indeed. 
In  the  election  of  Deacons,  Acts  vi.,  it 
is  said,  "Then  the  twelve  (not  Peter) 
called  the  multitude  of  the  disciples  unto 
them,  and  said.  It  is  not  reason  that  we 
should  leave  the  word  of  God,  and  serve 


THE    ROMAN    CATHOLIC    CHURCH.  89 

tables."  The  disciples  chose  men, 
"whom  they  set  before  the  apostles;  and 
when  they  had  prayed,  they  laid  their 
hands  on  them."  In  Acts  xv.,  we  learn 
that  some  matters  of  controversy  among 
the  churches  were  referred  to  the  apos- 
tles and  elders  at  Jerusalem.  Peter  was 
present  and  participated  in  the  discus- 
sion. Paul  and  Barnabas  also  made 
speeches;  but  James  presided  over  the 
assembly,  summed  up  its  decision,  and 
concluded  with  the  words,  •'  My  sentence 
is,"  and  so  on.  Is  it  possible,  then,  that 
if  Peter  was  supreme;  if  he  was  chief 
of  the  apostles,  the  Pope;  if  he  was  the 
head  of  the  Church,  that  he  would  not 
have  presided  at  this,  the  first  Synod  or 
General  Assembly  which  the  E"ew  Testa- 
ment Church  held?  Most  assuredly  he 
would. 

Again,  if  Peter  was  the  prince  or  chief 
of  the  apostles,  why  did  they  not  treat 
him  with  marked  respect?      Why  did 


90  THE   ROMAN    CATHOLIC    CHURCH. 

they  treat  him  simply  as  an'  equal  ?  The 
Pope  sends  his  messengers  whithersoever 
he  pleases,  but  Peter  \ya3  sent  whither- 
soever the  apostles  desired  that  he  should 
go!  See  Acts  viii.  14:  "^ow  when  the 
apostles  which  were  at  Jerusalem  heard 
that  Samaria  had  received  the  word  of 
God,  they  sent  unto  them  Peter  and 
John."  Paul  was  not  a  bigot,  yet  he 
says  that  he  "was  not  a  whit  behind  the 
very  chiefest  apostles." — 2  Cor.  xi.  5. 
Moreover,  Paul  says  that  he  withstood 
Peter  to  the  face,  "because  he  was  to  be 
blamed."— Gal.  ii.  11.  If,  then,  Peter 
was  thie  vicar  of  Jesus  Christ,  as  the 
Roman  Catholics  assert,  how  could  he 
be  wrong?  But  the  blessed  Saviour 
settles  this  question  forever.  Matt,  xxiii. 
8:  "Be  not  ye  called  Rabbi:  for  one  i& 
your  Master,  even  Christ;  and  all  ye  are 
brethren."  Also  Mark  ix.  33-35:  "And 
he  (Christ)  came  to  Capernaum :  and  be- 
ing in  the  house  he  asked  them,  What 


THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH.    91' 

was  it  that  ye  disputed  among  yourselves 
by  tiie  way?  But  they  held  their  peace: 
for  by  the  way  they  had  disputed  among 
themselves  Avho  should  be  the  greatest. 
And  he  sat  down,  and  called  the  twelve, 
and  saith  unto  them,  If  any  man  desire 
to  be  first,  the  same  shall  be  last  of  all, 
and  servant  of  all." 

We,  therefore,  see  that  there  is  no 
foundation  for  such  a  claim. 

III. THE    WORSHIP    OF    IMAGES. 

The  Roman  Catholic  Church  teaches 
that  it  is  right  to  worship  images.  The 
language  from  their  own  books  is,  that 
"images  of  Christ  and  of  the  Virgin 
Mother  of  God,  and  of  other  saints,  are 
to  be  had  and  retained,  especially  in 
churches,  and  due  honor  and  worship  to 
be  paid  to  them." 

The  reader  will  at  once  see  that  this 
is  contrary  to  the  Bible.  That  blessed 
book   says  (Ex.  xx.  4,  5) :    "  Thou   shalt 


92  THE   ROMAN    CATIIOLIC    CHURCH. 

not  make  unto  thee  any  graven  image, 
or  any  likeness  of  anything  that  is  in 
heaven  above,  or  that  is  in  the  earth  be- 
neath, or  that  is  in  the  water  under  the 
earth:  thou  shalt  not  bow  down  thyself 
to  them,  nor  serve  them:  for  I  the  Lord 
thy  God  am  a  jealous  God,  visiting  the 
iniquity  of  the  fathers  upon  the  children 
unto  the  third  and  fourth  generation  of 
them  that  hate  me,"  etc.  How  wicked, 
then,  to  do  a  thing  which  God  so  positively 
forbids !  But  go  into  any  Roman  Catho- 
lic church  you  may,  and  you  will  see  the 
members  bowing  down  before  these 
images ! 

IV. — READING    THE    SCRIPTURES. 

This  Church  also  teaches  that  the 
people  ought  not  to  be  permitted  to  read 
the  Scriptures.  The  language  is  as  fol- 
lows: '*  Seeing  it  is  manifest  by  expe- 
rience, that  if  the  Holy  Scriptures  be 
permitted  to  be  read  everywhere  indis- 


THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH.    93 

criminately,  in  the  vulgar  tongue,  more 
harm  than  good  would  result,"  etc.  Just 
think  of  it:  the  people  not  permitted  to 
read  the  Bible!  God  made  that  book 
for  every  one  to  read,  and  yet  the  mem- 
bers of  this  Church  are  not  permitted  to 
enjoy  that  privilege!  The  Bible  says 
(Psa.  cxix.  130):  "The  entrance  of  thy 
w^ords  giveth  light ;  it  giveth  understand- 
ing to  the  simple."  Again,  also,  we  read 
(Prov.  XXX.  5):  "Every  word  of  God 
is  pure."  So,  likewise,  the  Apostle  Paul 
tells  us  that  the  Scriptures  are  to  make 
us  wise  unto  salvation.  2  Tim.  iii.  15: 
"And  that  from  a  child  thou  hast  known 
the  holy  Scriptures,  which  are  able  to 
make  thee  wise  unto  salvation  through 
faith  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus."  The 
blessed  Saviour  also  says  (John  v.  39) : 
"Search  the  Scriptures;  for  in  them  ye 
think  ye  have  eternal  life:  and  they  are 
they  which  testify  of  me." 

How,  then,  can  a  Church,  with  all  this 


94    THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH. 

testimony    against   it,    dare   prevent  its 
members  from  reading  the  Bible!     Yet 

it  does ! 

V. — CONFESSION   TO    PRIESTS. 

The  members  of  this  Church  are  re- 
quired to  confess  their  sins  to  a  priest. 
The  language  is :  "  that  sacramental  con- 
fession of  sins  is  necessary  to  salvation 
by  divine  right,  and  that  he  is  accursed 
who  says  that  confession  to  a  priest 
alone,  in  secret,  is  a  human  invention." 
But  the  Scriptures  teach  that  it  is  to  God, 
and  not  to  man^  that  we  must  confess  our 
sins  in  order  to  have  them  pardoned 
David  says  (Psa.  xxxii.  5):  "I  acknowl- 
edged my  sin  unto  thee,  and  mine  ini- 
quity have  I  not  hid.  I  said,  I  will  con- 
fess my  transgressions  unto  the  Lord; 
and  thou  forgavest  the  iniquity  of  my  sin. 
Selah."  Also,  Psa.  li.  4:  '^Against  thee, 
thee  only,  have  I  sinned,  and  done  this 
evil  in  thy  sight:  that  thou  mightest  be 


THE   KOMAN   CATHOLIC    CHURCH.  95 

justified  when  thou  speakest,  and  be 
clear  when  thou  judgest."  Again,  the 
question  is  asked  in  Mark  ii.  7:  "Who 
can  forgive  sins  but  God  only." 

VI. THE  SACRAMENT  OF  THE  SUPPER. 

The  Roman  Catholic  Church  does  not 
permit  its  members  to  partake  of  both 
the  bread  and  wine  in  the  sacrament  of 
the  Supper.  The  edict  '^pronounces  any 
one  accursed  who  says  that  by  command 
of  God,  or  necessity  of  salvation,  all  and 
each  of  the  faithful  in  Christ  ought  to 
receive  the  sacrament  of  the  Eucharist 
in  both  kinds."  But  the  Bible  positively 
contradicts  such  teaching.  Matt.  xxvi. 
26-29 :  ''  And  as  they  were  eating,  Jesus 
took  bread,  and  blessed  it,  and  brake  it, 
and  gave  it  to  the  disciples,  and  said, 
Take,  eat ;  this  is  my  body.  And  he 
took  the  cup,  and  gave  thanks,  and  gave 
it  to  them,  saying,  Drink  ye  all  of  it: 
for  this  is  my  blood  of  the  new  testa- 


96    THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH. 

meut,  which  is  shed  for  many  for  the  re- 
mission of  sins.  But  I  say  unto  you,  I 
will  not  drink  henceforth  oi  this  fruit  of 
the  vine,  until  that  day  when  I  drink  it 
new  with  you  in  my  Father's  kingdom." 
Also  Mark  xiv.  22,  23:  "And  as  they 
did  eat,  Jesus  took  bread,  and  blessed, 
and  brake  it,  and  gave  to  them,  and  said, 
Take,  eat;  this  is  my  body.  And  he 
took  the  cup,  and  when  he  had  given 
thanks,  he  gave  it  to  them:  and  they  all 
drank  of  it." 

We,  therefore,  see  that  the  blessed  Sav- 
iour intended  that  his  followers  should 
partake  of  both  kinds  (the  bread  and 
the  wine),  and  commanded  that  all  who 
partook  of  the  one,  should  likewise  par- 
take of  the  other,  both  being  done  to- 
gether in  remembrance  of  his  broken 
body  and  his  shed  blood.  Hence,  it  is 
plain  that  there  is  no  sacrament  at  all  as 
Christ  ordained  it,  unless  it  be  celebrated 
in  both  kinds — the  bread  and  the  wine. 


THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH.    97 

How  wickedly,  then,  does  this  Church  act 
when  it  thus  administers  the  sacrament! 

VII. MARRIAGE    OF    THE    CLERGY. 

This  Church  does  not  permit  its  min- 
isters to  marry.  The  law  is  positive  that 
the  "clergy  may  not  marry."  But  the 
Bible  teaches  no  such  doctrine.  Heb. 
xiii.  4:  "Marriage  is  honorable  in  all, 
and  the  bed  undefiled:  but  whoremon- 
gers and  adulterers  God  will  judge." 
Again,  1  Cor.  vii.  2:  "^Nevertheless,  to 
avoid  fornication,  let  every  man  have  his 
own  wife,  and  let  every  woman  have 
her  own  husband." 

From  the  foregoing,  it  is  evident  that 
no  exception  is  made  of  the  clergy  or 
ministers  of  the  gospel;  nor  can  any  one 
show  that  God  has  excepted  Priests  or 
Monks. 

VIII. THE     PERSECUTIONS    OF    THE     CHURCH. 


The  history  of  this  Church  is  written 
lo. 

7 


in  blood.     For  centuries  after  its  birth,  it 


98    THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH. 

wielded  the  sword  with  most  desolating 
effect.  It  laid  its  bloody  hand  upon 
almost  every  instrument  of  torture — the 
sword,  the  faggot,  the  dungeon.  If  any 
one  doubts  this,  let  him  read  the  history 
of  the  Waldenses  and  the  Albigenses, 
through  many  generations,  and  see  how 
the  blood  of  those  pure,  good  people 
flowed  like  a  river  from  under  the  hand 
of  Papal  persecution.  Let  him  also  cast 
his  eye  over  the  mountains  of  Bohemia, 
or  the  green  fields  of  Spain,  and  see 
them  covered  with  the  dying  and  the 
dead.  Let  him  likewise  go  to  Paris  and 
witness  the  horrors  of  the  massacre  of 
Saint  Bartholomew;  or  to  Holland,  and 
see  her  sons  dying  by  tens  of  thousands 
in  the  slaughter  occasioned  by  the  Duke 
of  Alva. 

John  Dowling,  D.D.,  in  his  history  of 
Romanism,  tells  us  that  from  the  birth 
of  Popery  (the  Roman  Catholic  Church) 
in  607,  to  the  present  time,  it  is  estimated 


THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC  CHURCH.    99 

by  careful  and  credible  historians,  that 
more  than  fifty  millions  of  the  human 
family  have  been  slaughtered  by  thai 
Church,  an  average  of  more  than  forty 
thousand  religious  murders  for  every  year 
of  the  existence  of  Popery!  How  ap- 
propriate, then,  the  language  of  the 
apostle  (Rev.  xvii.  6) :  "I  saw  the  woman 
drunken  with  the  blood  of  the  saints, 
-and  with  the  blood  of  the  martyrs  of 
Jesus." 

The  foregoing  are  only  a  few  of  the 
objections  that  can  be  urged  against  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church,  but  surely  they 
are  sufficient.  We  are  not  astonished, 
therefore,  that  the  founders  of  the  Cum- 
berland Presbyterian  Church  preferred  a 
new  organization  rather  than  connect 
themselves  with  sucli  a  denomination. 


100  THE    EPISCOPAL    CHURCH. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

CHURCH     OF    ENGLAND — THE     EPISCOPAL 
CHURCH. 

Why,  it  may  be  asked,  did  not  the 
founders  of  the  Cumberland  Presbyterian 
Church  join  the  Episcopal  Church?  This 
denomination  had  its  origin  in  England 
during  the  fifteenth  century.  There  it 
is  called  the  Church  of  England;  in  this- 
country  it  is  known  as  the  Episcopal 
Church. 

I. — ^ITS    EARLY    HISTORY. 

This  Church,  as  we  now  find  it,  was 
organized  during  the  reign  of  Henry 
Vni.,  King  of  England.  For  a  num- 
ber of  years  this  monarch  had  been  a 
zealous  member  of  the  Roman  Catholic 


THE    EPISCOPAL    CHURCH.  101 

Church,  and  did  all  in  his  power  against 
the  Reformation.  He  went  so  far  as  to 
write  a  book  opposing  Martin  Luther 
and  defending  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church.  For  this  great  service  the  Pope 
of  Rome  complimented  him  with  the 
title  of  "Defender  of  the  Faith  "  But 
he  was  a  very  wicked  man,  and  hid  at- 
tachment to  his  Church  did  not  last 
many  3^ears.  He  conceived  an  affection 
for  a  woman  named  Anne  Boleyn,  and 
resolved  to  divorce  his  wife,  Catherine  of 
Aragon,  to  whom  he  had  been  married 
eighteen  years.  The  Pope  refused  to 
grant  the  divorce,  and  King  Henry  then 
assumed  the  title  of  Supreme  Head  of 
the  English  Church.  Having  taken  this 
step,  he  put  down  the  monasteries  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church,  and  appropri- 
ated the  property  to  secular  purposes. 
He  then  married  Anne  Boleyn,  but  in  a 
short  time  he  had  her  beheaded  on  the 
scaffold,    and  married  Lady  Jane   Sey- 


102  THE    EPISCOPAL    CHURCH. 

mour,  who  died  soon  afterwards.  He 
next  married  Anne  of  Cleves,  but  the 
union  proving  to  be  an  unhappy  one,  he 
divorced  her,  and  caused  Cromwell,  who 
helped  to  make  the  match,  to  be  be- 
headed. His  next  wife  was  Catharine 
Howard,  whom  he  also  beheaded.  He 
then  married  Catharine  Parr. 

From  the  foregoing,  it  will  be  seen 
that  this  wicked  king  had  six  wives,  and 
for  this  reason  he  is  called  in  history  the 
many-wived  Henry !  He  was  also  a  very 
cruel  man,  for,  during  his  reign,  he 
burnt  the  famous  Tyndale  at  the  stake, 
and  a  number  of  other  great  and  good 
men.  Truly  has  it  been  said  of  him, 
"that  he  never  spared  man  in  his  anger 
nor  woman  in  his  lust." 

II. — SALVATION   BY   BAPTISM. 

In  baptizing  an  infant,  the  priest  or 
minister  is  instructed  to  say,  after  the 
cliild  has  been  baptized,  "  We  yield  thee 


THE    EPISCOPAL     CHUKCIl.  103 

hearty  thanks,  most  merciful  Father, 
that  it  hath  pleased  thee  to  regenerate 
this  infant  with  thy  Holy  Spirit,  to  re- 
ceive him  for  thine  own  child  by  adop- 
tion, and  to  incorporate  him  into  thy 
holy  Church."  The  same  doctrine  is 
taught  in  receiving  grown  persons  into 
this  Church  in  the  act  of  Confirmation;  for 
the  Bishop  is  taught  to  say,  "Almighty 
and  ever-living  God,  who  hast  vouch- 
safed to  regenerate  these  thy  servants  by 
-water  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  hast  given 
unto  them  forgiveness  of  all  their  sins," 
etc.  Let  the  reader  look  again  at  this 
language:  "Regenerate  this  infant  with 
thy  Holy  Spirit."  I^ow,  to  show  that 
we  have  not  mistaken  their  meaning,  the 
commentators  on  the  Prayer-book  (a 
book  about  which  we  will  speak  in  an- 
other place)  say  that  this  "regeneration" 
takes  place  alone  in  or  by  baptism.  And 
as  additional  proof,  read  the  following 
questions  and  answers,  which  are  copied 


104  THE    EPISCOPAL    CHURCH. 

from  a  catechism  published  by  that 
Church  for  children : 

"Q.  What  were  you  made  in  baptism? 

A.  A  member  of  Christ. 

Q.  And  what  else? 

A.  The  child  of  God. 

Q.  What  else? 

A.  An  inheritor  of  the  kingdom  o*^ 
heaven. 

Q.  What  is  the  special  grace  of  bap- 
tism? 

A.  Cleansing  from  sin." 

By  examining  again  the  language  used 
in  baptizing  adults,  we  see  that  the  priest 
is  required  to  say  that  they  are  regen- 
erated ''by  water  and  the  Holy  Ghost." 
Water,  then,  to  say  the  least,  is  one  oi 
the  agents  that  regenerates  the  soul. 
Attention  is  also  called  to  a  catechism  of 
that  Church  for  adults.  In  response  to 
the  question,  "What  is  baptism?"  the 
answer  is : 

"It  is  the  sacrament  wherein  persons 


THE    EPISCOPAL     CHURCH.  105 

are  made  members  of  Christ,  children  oi 
God,  and  inheritors  of  the  kingdom  of 
neaveu." 

What  an  absurdity !  How  can  the  ap- 
plication of  water  cleanse  and  purify  the 
heart?  There  is  not  a  single  verse  in  the 
Bible  that  teaches  such  a  sentiment.  But 
as  this  doctrine  of  salvation  by  baptism 
will  be  considered  at  some  length  under 
the  head,  •' Campbellite  Church,"  it  is 
dismissed  for  the  present. 

III. — APOSTOLIC    SUCCESSION. 

The  members  of  the  Episcopal  Church 
claim  that  it  is  the  Church,  because 
they  say  they  can  prove  that  their 
preachers  are  in  the  "regular  line  of 
succession"  from  the  apostles  them- 
selves. The  doctrine  they  teach  is 
simply  this:  that  the  persons  called 
Bishops  were  each  ordained  by  a  pre- 
ceding Bishop  back  to  the  apostles, 
•whose    successors   the    Bishops   in    this 


106  THE    EPISCOPAL     CHURCH. 

Church  claim  to  be;  that  not  one  link 
in  the  long  chain  is  wanting;  that  or- 
dination bj  these  Bishops  alone  is  valid- 
and  that  the  persons  ordained  by  them 
are  the  only  true  ministers  of  the  gospel. 
In  reply  to  this  absurd  theory,  we  have 
space  only  for  a  few  arguments. 

1.  There  is  not  the  slightest  evidence 
in  the  Bible  for  Bishops  at  all  in  the 
sense  in  which  Episcopalians  use  the 
term.  The  words  presbyter  and  bishop 
mean  precisely  the  same  thing  in  the 
j^ew  Testament;  and  Presbyters  were 
the  ancient  Bishops,  and  are  the  onl]/ 
Bishops  which  are  mentioned  in  the 
sacred  Scriptures.  In  the  previous  chap- 
ter— the  chapter  upon  the  Roman  Cath- 
olic Church — it  was  proven  by  the  Sav- 
iour himself  that  he  had  but  one  kind 
of  ministers,  and  that  they  were  equal 
in  power  and  authority. 

2.  If  the  theory  of  the  Episcopal 
Church  is  true,  then  there  is  no  Churchy 


THE    EPISCOPAL    CHURCH.  107 

for  there  is  not  a  denomination  on  earth 
that  can  show  a  regular  succession  from 
the  apostles  until  now.  If  one  link  is 
wanting,  then  all  depending  on  it  will 
fall;  and  that  many  links  have  heen 
broken,  no  one  familiar  with  the  facts  of 
history  will  deny. 

3.  The  best  informed  men  in  the  Epis- 
copal Church  admit  that  the  theory  is  a 
myth — is  utterly  false.  The  great  histo- 
rian of  England,  Macaulay,  who  was  a 
member  of  the  Church  of  England — the 
Episcopal  Church — says:  "The  trans- 
mission of  orders  from  the  apostles  to 
an  English  clergyman  of  the  present 
day,  must  have  been  through  a  very 
great  number  of  Intermediate  persons. 
Now  it  is  probable  that  no  clergyman  in 
the  Church  of  England  can  trace  his 
spiritual  genealogy,  from  Bishop  to 
Bishop,  even  so  far  back  as  the  Refor- 
mation. There  remain  fifteen  hundred 
or  sixteen  hundred  years  during  which 


108  THE    EPISCOPAL     CHURCH. 

the  history  of  the  transmission  of  orders 
is  buried  in  utter  darkness.  And  whether 
he  be  priest,  by  succession  from  the  apos- 
tles, depends  on  the  question  whether, 
during  that  long  period,  some  thousands 
of  events  took  place,  any  one  ot  which 
may,  without  any  gross  improbability, 
be  ^upposed  not  to  have  taken  place. 
We  have  not  a  tittle  of  evidence  to  any 
one  of  these  events.  We  do  not  even 
know  the  names  or  countries  of  the  men 
to  whom  it  is  taken  for  granted  that 
these  events  happened." 

The  foregoing  admits  all  that  we  could 
ask,  and  coming  from  such  authority  in 
the  Episcopal  Church,  it  is  conclusive 
against  the  dogma  of  succession. 

4.  Its  strongest  advocates  have  to 
admit  that  their  succession  has  come 
down  through  men  of  the  greatest  wick- 
edness and  the  worst  of  morals.  Often, 
very  often,  the  prelacy  was  obtained  by 
money,    murder,    and   war!      TTow   the 


THE    EPISCOPAL    CHURCH.  109 

question  is,  would  God  use  such  a  vile, 
corrupt  channel  for  keeping  his  Church 
in  existence?  'No,  never!  The  Bible 
tells  us  that  "it  pleased  God  by  the  fool- 
ishness of  preaching  to  save  them  that 
believe."  In  other  words,  God  has  or- 
dained that  by  the  preaching  of  the  gos- 
pel the  world  is  to  be  saved;  yet,  accord- 
ing to  this  theory,  no  man  dare  preach 
this  gospel  unless  he  is  in  the  succession ! 
Is  it  possible  that  God  has  left  the  great 
matter  of  human  salvation  upon  such 
uncertainty?  In  some  cases  the  succes- 
sion came,  say  the  advocates,  through, 
children ;  and  the  certainty  that  no  irreg- 
ularity occurred  with  this  child,  or  this 
drunken  man,  or  this  murderer,  is  as 
important  to  the  Christian,  if  this  doc- 
trine be  true,  as  the  resurrection  of 
Christ.  If  the  Saviour  had  not  risen 
from  the  grave,  all  would  have  been  lost. 
And,  likewise,  if  there  is  a  defective  link 
anywhere  in  this  chain,  all  is  lost  for- 


110  THE    EPISCOPAL    CHURCH. 

ever.  God  forbid  that  the  salvation  of 
sinners  should  have  to  depend  on  a  chain, 
made  up,  in  great  part,  of  drunken,  li- 
centious, debauched  men !  The  truth  is, 
a  '^succession"  is  not  needed,  for  all 
true  ministers  are  still  called  to  the  work 
as  was  Aaron.  Then  where  is  the  neces- 
sity for  "succession?" 

Roman  Catholics,  Episcopalians,  Mo- 
hammedans, and  Mormons  all  profess  to 
have  this  "succession."  But  surely  all 
of  them  cannot  have  it;  and,  unless  bet- 
ter evidence  can  be  given  than  has  ever 
yet  been  produced,  we  will  not  believe 
that  any  of  them  have  it.  In  the  list  of 
those  claiming  to  have  it,  we  omitted  the 
Kalmucks,  a  race  of  the  Tartars.  They 
are  confident  that  they  have  it,  and  this 
is  the  way  they  say  they  obtained  it: 
"When  the  High  Priest  or  Bishop  dies, 
his  body  is  burned  to  ashes,  and  the 
ashes  are  carefully  collected  into  a  bottle. 
Every  day  his  successor  mixes  some  of 


THE    EPISCOPAL    CHURCH.  Ill 

the  ashes  with  water  and  drinks  it,  until 
all  the  ashes  are  used  up.  In  this  way 
the  body  of  the  Bishop  is  taken  into  the 
body  of  his  successor.  This  is  ''  apostolic 
succession"  among  the  Kalmucks;  and 
the  theory  is  fully  as  plausible  as  that  of 
the  Episcopal  Church.  The  whole  thing 
of  "succession"  is  the  mainspring  and 
the  mainstay  of  priestcraft. 

IV. — CONFIRMATION,    HOLY    DAYS,    ETC. 

According  to  the  doctrines  and  usages 
of  this  Church,  members  are  not  entitled 
to  the  sacrament  of  the  Supper  until  the 
hands  of  the  Bishop  have  been  laid  upon 
their  heads.  By  so  doing,  he  confirms 
them — brings  them  into  full  fellowship 
in  the  Church.  Remember,  hovvever, 
that  no  one  but  a  Bishop  can  do  this. 
He  has  a  large  field  to  visit — his  diocese 
covering  the  area  of  a  State  or  more — 
yet  no  one,  until  the  Bishop  says  so,  can 
be  permitted  to  celebrate  the  death  and 


112  THE    EPISCOPAL    CHURCH. 

sufferings  of  Christ — must  be  at  least 
ready  for  confirmation.  What  an  ab- 
surdity!     What  folly! 

That  Church  also  has  quite  a  list  of 
Holy  Days — St.  Peter's  day,  St.  Mark's 
day,  St.  Thomas'  day,  together  with 
Fasts  and  Lents,  etc.,  etc. — which  they 
observe.  But  all  these  Grood  Fridays, 
I^ew  Moons,  etc.,  as  the  Church  observes 
them,  are  nothing  on  earth  except  the 
"traditions  and  endless  genealogies," 
which  the  Bible  condemns,  and  which 
come  either  from  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church  or  from  Pagan  mythology! 
God  says  (Isa.  i.  14) :  "Your  new  moons 
and  your  appointed  feasts  my  soul 
hateth — they  are  a  trouble  unto  me;  I 
am  weary  to  bear  them." 

V. THE    PRAYER-BOOK. 

The  prayers  offered  by  ministers  and 
people  are  printed.  They  are  good,  in 
the  main,  but  they   tend  to  formalism. 


THE    EPISCOPAL     CHURCH.  113 

Yet  to  this  printed  liturgy  they  are 
bound  by  a  law  that  is  inflexible — it  must 
always  be  used  in  public  worship!  The 
book,  too,  so  far  as  we  know,  is  always 
used  in  private  devotions.  Who  ever 
heard  a  minister  in  that  Church  pray 
except  "out  of  a  book"?  'Now  the 
question  is,  Can  any  book  of  printed 
prayers  meet  the  wants  of  all  Christians 
on  all  occasions  of  worship?  The  patri- 
archs, prophets,  apostles,  martyrs,  never 
so  prayed — were  never  so  circumscribed 
in  their  religious  devotions.  Had  the 
great  John  Knox  so  prayed,  the  proba- 
bilities are  that  Mary  Queen  of  Scots — 
a  Roman  Catholic  Sovereign — would  not 
have  said  that  she  feared  his  prayers 
more  than  she  did  the  army  of  England. 
But  when  he  prayed,  "  0  God,  give  me 
Scotland  or  I  die,"  the  very  earth  seemed 
to  tremble!  In  brief,  the  longing,  sor- 
rowing heart  demands  more  freedom^ 
more  latitude,  and  greater  variety  of 
8 


114  THE    EPISCOPAL     CHURCH. 

expression,  than  is  found  in  that  Prayer- 
book. 

VI. — TOO    LOOSE    IN    ITS    DISCIPLINE. 

It  would,  perhaps,  be  safe  to  say  that 
no  denomination  permits  greater  liberties 
in  its  members  than  the  Episcopal 
Church.  A  venerable  Bishop,  it  is  said, 
once  observed  to  a  gentleman  who  left 
the  Methodists  to  join  the  Episcopalians, 
"I  am,  if  possible,  more  opposed  to 
dancing  than  are  the  Methodists,  because 
ours  is  called  the  'dancing  Church.'" 
In  short,  there  is  apparently  so  little 
spirituality  in  that  Cliurch,  that  the 
members  are  not  reproved  for  becoming 
absorbed  in  the  fashions,  vanities,  and 
frivolities  of  the  world.  Who  ever 
heard  of  a  revival  of  religion  in  that 
Church?  And  why  is  it  that  we  rarely 
find  one  of  their  churches  in  the  country^ 
They  have  their  strength  in  towns  and 
cities,  where  mirth,  gayety,  and  pleasure 


THE    EPISCOPAL    CHURCH.  115 

seem  most  to  abound;  and  were  it  not 
for  other  Churches,  the  people  in  the 
country  would  be  left  to  perish ! 

VII. WANT    OF    CHRISTIAN    FELLOWSHIP. 

The  Episcopal  Church  is  greatly  want- 
ing in  that  broad  Christian  fraternity 
that  characterizes  most  of  the  other  de- 
nominations. The  ministers  rarely,  if 
ever,  exchange  pulpits  with  the  clergy 
of  other  Churches.  The  expression  may 
seem  harsh,  but  facts  justify  it:  the 
general  bearing  of  the  ministers  and 
members  of  that  Church  seems  to  say, 
"We  are  more  holy  than  you."  This 
want  of  fraternity,  however,  may  be  due 
to  the  fact  that  the  Episcopalians  claim 
to  be  the  Church,  and  look  upon  all 
others  as  "sects"  and  "heretics."  This 
High  Churchism,  however,  tends  not  only 
to  sectarian  bigotry,  but  to  spiritual  de- 
cay; for  in  proportion  as  we  exalt  ritual 
service,  in  the  same  proportion  do  we 


116  THE    EPISCOPAL    CHURCH. 

neglect  vital  godliness.  Paul  said:  "But 
God  forbid  that  I  should  glory,  save  in 
the  cross  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  by 
whom  the  world  is  crucified  unto  me, 
and  I  unto  the  world." — Gal.  vi.  14. 

Other  objectionable  features  could  be 
jjresented,  but  these  are  sufficient  to  jus- 
tify the  founders  of  the  Cumberland 
Presbyterian  Church  in  passing  by  the 
Episcopalians  when  they  were  seeking 
an  ecclesiastical  home. 


THE    PRESBYTERIAN    CHURCH.  117 


CHAPTER  IX. 

THE    PRESBYTERIAN    CHURCH. 

We  have  already  seen  in  this  little 
book  that  the  founders  of  the  Cumber- 
land Presbyterian  Church  left  the  Pres- 
byterian Church,  and  organized  a  new 
one.  The  reasons  for  that  step  have 
already  been  given  ;  but  the  promise  was 
made  that,  at  the  proper  place,  the  sub- 
ject would  be  more  fuUy  discussed,  in  a 
doctrinal  point  of  view. 

The  word  Presbyterian  comes  from  the 
Greek  word  Fresbuteros,  which  means 
senior-^  or  elder,  signifying  that  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  Church  is  by  Presbyters ; 
that  is,  by  an  association  of  teaching 
elders  and  ruling  elders.  There  is 
nothing,  therefore,  in  the  word  that  in- 


118  THE    PRESBYTERIAN    CHURCH. 

dicates  doctrine.  To  ascertain  what  their 
tenets  are,  we  must  examine  their 
Standards. 

The  Confession  of  Faith  of  the  Pres- 
byterian Church  was  formed  b}^  what  is 
known  in  history  as  the  Westminster 
Assembly.  This  body  was  appointed  by 
the  Long  Parliament  of  England.  It 
consisted  of  one  hundred  and  twenty- 
one  clergymen  and  thirty  la^-men — ten 
of  whom  were  Lords  and  twenty  Com 
moners — together  with  four  clerical  and 
two  lay  commissioners  from  the  Church 
of  Scotland.  This  notable  Assembly 
held  its  first  meeting  July  1,  1643,  and 
continued  to  sit  till  February  22,  1649— 
six  3^ears.  The  doctrines  agreed  upon 
by  that  Convocation,  constitute  the  Con- 
fession of  Faith  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church.  It  may  not  be  improper  to 
state  in  this  connection,  that  the  theolog- 
ical views  of  John  Calvin  were  the  doc- 
trines which  were  incorporated  in  that 


THE    PRESBYTERIAN    CHURCH.  119 

book.  He  was  born  Ju\j  10,  1500,  in 
Noyon,  France,  and  was  brought  up 
in  the  Roman  Catholic  Church ;  but 
at  the  age  of  twenty-three  he  left  that 
organization.  As  a  scholar  and  debater 
he  had  few  equals  in  his  day.  Being  a 
man  of  strong  and  determiiied  will,  he 
was  accused  of  being  tyraunical  iu  his  re- 
ligious sentiments.  Because  his  theo- 
logical views  were,  in  the  main,  adopted 
by  the  Westminster  Assembly,  those  who 
adhere  to  that  sj^stem  are  called  Calvinists. 
Having  made  these  explanatory  state- 
ments, it  is  now  proposed  to  follow  the 
general  plan  of  this  little  book,  and 
show  why  the  founders  of  the  Cumber- 
land Presbyterian  Church  could  not 
ad<)pt  the  system  of  doctrines  taught  by 
the  Presbyterian  Church. 

I. — GOD    THE    AUTHOR   OF    SIN. 

In   the    Confession   of    Faith    of    the 
Presbyterian  Church,  Chapter  III.  Sec.  1, 


120  THE    PRESBYTERIAN    CHURCH. 

it  is  said :  "  God  did  from  all  eternity, 
by  the  most  wise  and  holy  counsel  of 
his  own  will,  freely  and  unchangeably 
ordain  whatsoever  comes  to  pass." 
Kow  it  is  most  certain  that  sin  "does 
come  to  pass";  hence,  according  to  the 
doctrine  here  taught,  God  must  be  the 
author  of  sin  I  Let  the  reader  carefully 
note  the  word  ''whatsoever.''  This  em- 
braces everything — from  the  greatest  to 
the  least  event  that  can  happen — every 
motive,  every  desire,  every  inclination, 
every  act  of  the  whole  human  race, 
whether  virtuous  or  vicious!  It  is  true, 
the  same  book,  in  the  same  Chapter  and 
Section,  adds,  "Yet,  so  as  thereby  neither 
is  God  the  author  of  sin,  nor  is  violence 
offered  to  the  will  of  the  creatures,  nor 
is  the  liberty  or  contingency  of  second 
causes  taken  away,  but  rather  estab- 
lished." But  what  good  does  that  ^^yet, 
so  as''  do?  It  is  simply  an  assertion 
without    proof.     If    God    has   ordained 


THE    PRESBYTERIAN    CHURCH.  12] 

-"  whatsoever  conies  to  pass,"  and  as  sin 
■does  "come  to  pass,"  how  can  it  be  said, 

■^'neither  is  God  the  author  of  sin"? 
That  ''yet,  so  as''  therefore,  is  worth 
nothing  I 

ir. THE    DOCTRmE    OP    FATALITY. 

In  the  same  Chapter  (HI.),  Sec.  3,  it  is 
^aid:  "By  the  decree  of  God,  for  the 
manifestation  of  his  glory,  some  men  and 
angels  are  predestinated  unto  everlasting 
life,  and  others  fore-ordained  to  everlast- 
ing death."  In  the  same  Chapter,  Sec. 
5,  it  is  said  that  the  "elect"  are  chosen 
in  Christ  "  without  any  foresight  of  faith 
or  good  works,  or  perseverance  in  either 
•of  them,  or  any  other  thing  in  the  crea- 
ture, as  conditions  or  causes  moving  him 
thereunto;  and  all  to  the  praise  of  his 
glorious  grace."  In  Sec.  7,  of  the  same 
Chapter,  it  is  said:  "The  rest  of  man- 
kind, God  was  pleased,  according  to  the 
unsearchable    counsel    of  his    own  will, 


122  THE    PRESBYTERIAN    CHURCH. 

whereby  he  extendeth  or  withholdetb 
mercy  as  he  pleaseth,  for  the  glory  of  his 
sovereign  power  over  his  creatures,  to 
pass  by,  and  to  ordain  them  to  dishonor 
and  wrath  for  their  sin,  to  the  praise  of 
his  glorious  justice." 

This  item  of  fatality,  or  this  particular 
phase  of  it,  at  least,  was  commented  upon 
in  the  historical  part  of  this  little  book^ 
and  it  is  not  deemed  necessary  to  con- 
sume further  time  upon  the  subject.  It 
will  not  be  out  of  place,  however,  to  say 
that  the  doctrine  here  taught  is  in  direct 
violation  of  the  plain  declarations  of  the 
sacred  Scriptures.  If  "  some  men  and  an- 
gels are  predestinated  to  everlasting  life,. 
and  others  fore-ordained  to  everlasting 
death,"  and  this  is  done,  too,  "  without 
any  foresight  of  faith  or  good  works,"^ 
then  men  and  angels  are  not  free  agents. 
Away  with  such  absurd  teachings  ^ 
they  are  dishonoring  to  Grod,  to  aiigelsy 
and  to  men  I 


THE    PRESBYTERIAN    CHURCH.  123 


HI. — -A    LIxMITED     ATONEMENT. 

The  Confession  of  Faith  of  the  Pres- 
byterian Church  teaches  that  Christ 
died  for  none  but  the  "elect."  lu  Chap- 
ter in.  Sec.  6,  it  is  said :  ''  Wherefore 
they  who  are  elected,  being  fallen  in 
Adam,  are  redeemed  by  Christ,  are  ef- 
fectually called  unto  fa,ith  in  Christ  by 
his  Spirit  working  in  due  season,"  etc. 
And  in  the  last  clause  of  the  same  sec- 
tion, it  is  said:  "Xeither  are  any  others? 
redeemed  by  Christ,  effectually  called, 
justified,  adopted,  sanctified,  and  saved, 
but  the  elect  only." 

Now,  to  show  that  we  do  not  misrepre- 
sent the  sentiment  of  the  Church  upon 
this  point,  we  will  quote  what  Rev. 
Robert  Shaw  says.  He  wrote  an  Expo- 
sition of  the  Confession  of  Faith,  and  it 
has  been  endorsed  by  that  Church.  His 
language  is :  "  Christ  died  exclusively  for 
the  elect,  and  purchased  redemption  for 


124  THE    PRESBYTERIAN    CHURCH 

them  alone;  in  other  words,  that  Christ 
made  atonement  only  for  the  elect,  and 
that  in  no  sense  did  he  die  for  the  rest  of 
the  race."  But  the  Bible  says  (John  iii. 
16) :  "For  God  so  -loved  the  world,  that 
he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son,  that  who- 
soever believeth  in  him  should  not  per- 
ish, but  have  everlasting  life."  Again, 
Heb.  ii.  9:  "But  we  see  Jesus,  who  was 
made  a  little  lower  than  the  angels  for 
the  suffering  of  death,  crowned  with 
glory  and  honour;  that  he  by  the  grace 
of  God  should  taste  death  for  every 
man."  Also,  1  John  ii.  2:  "And  he  is 
the  propitiation  for  our  sins:  and  not 
for  our's  only,  but  also  for  the  sins  of  the 
whole  world  " 

IV. — THE    CONDITION    OF    INFANTS. 

The  Confession  of  Faith,  Chapter  X., 
Sec.  3,  says:  "Elect  infants  dying  in  in- 
fancy, are  regenerated  and  saved  by 
Christ  through  the  Spirit,  who  worketh 


THE    PRESBYTERIAN    CHURCH.  125 

when,  and  where,  and  how  he  pleaseth. 
So  also  are  all  other  elect  persons  who 
are  incapable  of  being  outwardly  called 
by  the  ministry  of  the  word," 

Let  the  reader  note  the  language, 
"elect  infants,"  etc.  If  there  are  "elect 
infants,"  there  must  be  non-elect  infants, 
else  the  expression  has  no  meaning.  If 
there  are  non-elect  infants,  then  they  are 
lost  if  they  die  in  infancy.  Our  Calvin- 
istic  friends,  it  is  true,  attempt  to  evade 
this  point  by  saying  that  none  but 
*•  elect  infants"  die  in  infancy.  How  do 
they  know  this?  But  if  the  doctrine  of 
'^election,"  as  held  by  Presbyterians,  is 
true,  then  it  is  certain  that  there  are 
"elect"  and  non-elect  infants.  It  could 
not  be  otherwise,  if  "  some  men  and  angels 
re  predestinated  unto  everlasting  life. 
and  others  fore-ordained  to  everlasting 
death";  for,  if  this  predestination  took 
place,  as  the  Confession  of  Faith  de- 
clares,   "before    the   foundation    of    the 


12d  THE    PRESBYTERIAN    CHURCH. 

world  was  laid,"  then  it  was  true  of  the 
two  classes  when  they  were  infants. 
Consequently,  there  must  be  ^' elect''  and 
non-elect  infants;  and  as  none  can  be 
saved  but  the  ''  elect,"  no  ditference  when 
the  non-elect  die,  whether  in  infancy  or 
in  old  age,  they  are  most  certainly  lost ! 
Instead,  tlien,  of  trying  to  evade  the 
doctrine  of  "infant  damnation,"  as  our 
Presbyterian  friends  do,  why  do  they 
not  simply  say  that  such  a  doctrine  is  in 
perfect  agreement  with  the  theory  of 
"election"  as  taught  by  them?  In 
other  words,  why  may  not  God  just  as 
well  punish  an  infant  as  to  punish  a 
grown  person,  inasmuch  as  a  grown 
person,  if  he  is  of  the  number  that 
has  been  "passed  by,"  is  just  as  helpless 
as  an  infant — can  no  more  believe  in 
Christ  than  can  an  infant;  nor  is  he  one 
whit  more  responsible  for  not  believing, 
if  this  doctrine  of  "elect  infants"  is 
true? 


THE  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH.     127 
y. — CONCERNING  THE  HEATHEN. 

The  same  Confession  of  Faith,  Chap- 
ter X.,  Sec.  4  (latter  clause),  says :  "  Much 
less  can  men,  not  professing  the  Chris- 
tian religion,  be  saved  in  any  other  way 
whatsoever,  be  they  never  so  diligent  to 
frame  their  lives  according  to  the  light 
of  nature,  and  the  law  of  that  religion 
they  do  profess."  Also  in  answer  to 
Question  No.  60,  in  the  Larger  Cate- 
chism, we  have  the  following:  "They, 
who,  having  never  heard  the  gospel, 
know  not  Jesus  Christ,  and  believe  not 
in   him,  cannot  be  saved." 

^ow,  as  we  have  already  seen  else- 
where, this  same  book  teaches  that  God 
chose  some  "unto  everlasting  life,"  with- 
out reference  to  either  their  "faith  or 
good  works";  then  why  may  not  God 
have  chosen  some  of  the  heathen  to 
"everlasting  life"?  Why  can  there  not 
be  elect  heathen?     Why  must  God  be 


128  THE    PRESBYTERIAN   CHURCH. 

confined  to  Christian  lands,  inasmuch  as 
the  condition,  faith,  and  good  works  of 
the  elect  had  nothing  to  do  as  "  causes 
moving  him  thereto  "?  Is  it  not  strange 
that  not  one  of  the  millions  upon  millions 
of  the  adult  heathen  were  elected  tc 
everlasting  life?  Yet  not  one  of  thero 
has  been  so  chosen,  if  the  Confession  of 
Faith  be  true.  But  how  do  they  know 
this?  Should  they  not  be  a  little  more 
cautious  ? 

VI. — THE  EFFECTS  OF  SUCH  A    SYSTEM. 

If  God,  from  the  foundation  of  the 
world,  as  this  Confession  of  Faith 
teaches,  chose  some  to  everlasting  life, 
and  others  to  everlasting  death,  with- 
out reference  to  "faith  or  good  works," 
then  where  is  the  necessity  of  preaching 
the  gospel?  This  book  teaches  that  the 
number  to  be  saved  is  definite  and  fixed, 
and  the  number  to  be  damned  is  also  de- 
finite and  fixed.     What,  then,  have  we 


THE    PRESBYTERIAN   CHURCH.  129 

to  stiniuliite  us  to  action?  The  practical 
tendency  of  such  a  system  is  evil,  and 
evil  continually.  Skepticism,  impeni- 
tence, discouragement,  and  hardness  of 
heart,  are  the  legitimate  results  of  such 
a  system. 

VII. MINISTERIAL    EDUCATION. 

In  a  previous  chapter  in  this  little 
work,  we  saw,  from  the  Standards  of  the 
Presbyterian  Church,  that  no  one  is 
permitted  to  become  a  minister  therein, 
unless  he  has  "a  diploma  of  Bachelor  or 
Master  of  Arts,"  and,  in  addition, ''  shall 
have  studied  divinity  at  least  two  years, 
under  some  approved  divine,  or  professor 
of  theology." 

Kow,  be  it  distinctly  understood,  the 
founders  of  the  Cumberland  Presbyterian. 
Church  were  not  opposed  to  the  educa- 
tion of  the  ministry,  and  to  the  very 
highest  education  when  practicable,  but 
they  were  unwilling  to  adopt  the  rigid 
9 


130  THE    PRESBYTERIAN    CHURCH. 

rule  of  the  Presbyterian  Church.  They, 
therefore,  made  the  minimum  of  lit- 
erary qualifications,  to  consist  of  a 
good  English  education;  but  at  the  same 
time,  they  insisted  upon  a  classical  edu- 
cation when  circumstances  would  jus- 
tify. They  would  not  say,  however,  that 
the  extensive  course  prescribed  by  the 
"Mother  Church"  was  indispensable,  be- 
cause the}^  did  not  think  that  such  a  po- 
sition could  be  sustained  by  either  reason 
or  Scripture. 

In  many  sections  of  the  country,  it  is 
next  to  impossible  to  furnish  an  adequate 
number  of  ministers  who  have  been 
classically  educated;  and,  indeed,  if  it 
could  be  done,  it  would  not  be  for  the 
best.  Besides,  the  blessed  Saviour  made 
no  such  requisitions  of  his  apostles,  for 
there  was  not  one  out  of  the  twelve  that 
was  tlius  educated.  It  is  true,  Paul  was, 
but  he  was  not  called  to  the  ministry  until 
aftei  the  death  and  ascension  of  Christ. 


THE    PKESBYTEillA^v'    CHURCH.  131 

The  truth  is,  a  Charch,  as  well  as  any 
other  organizatiou,  must  take  a  practi- 
cal, coramon-sense  view  of  matters  and 
things.  Some  of  the  most  eminent  men 
in  other  professions — law,  medicine,  etc., 
— have  been  those  who  were  not  classi- 
cally educated.  And  has  not  the  same 
been  true  in  relation  to  the  gospel  min- 
istry? Most  certainly  it  has;  and,  if  the 
reader  will  pause  a  moment,  he  can  recall 
a  vast  number  of  instances.  Who  would 
dare  silence  such  men  as  Whittle, 
Moody,  and  a  host  of  others  of  that  kind 
that  might  be  mentioned?  Yet  the 
^'standard"  in  the  Presbyterian  Church, 
on  the  subject  of  ministerial  education, 
would  seal  their  lips  forever ! 

Does  God  never  call  men  to  the  minis- 
try who  profess  religion  rather  late  in 
life — men  of  families,  and  men  who  have 
neither  the  time  nor  the  means  to  take 
the  extensive  course  prescribed  by  the 
Presbyterian    Church?      What    of    old 


132  THE    PRESBYTERIAN   CHURCH. 

John  Bunyan  and  a  host  of  others  like 
him,  whose  names  are  immortal? 

This  is  an  interesting  topic,  but  there 
is  neither  time  nor  space  to  pursue  it 
further.  We  cannot  dismiss  it,  however, 
without  saying  in  one  broad,  compre- 
hensive sentence:  Such  a  rigid  standard 
as  the  Presbyterian  Church  demands  on 
the  subject  of  ministerial  education,  is 
warranted  neither  by  reason  nor  8crip- 
ture^  and  will  inevitably  curtail  the  use- 
fulness and  efficiency  of  any  denomina- 
tion that  adheres  to  it. 

Because  of  the  foregoing  objections^ 
therefore,  we  can  readily  see  how  the 
founders  of  the  Cumberland  Presbyterian 
Church  could  not  remain  in  the  Presby- 
terian Church. 


THE    BAPTIST    CHLRCH.  133 


CHAPTER   X. 

THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH. 

Some,  perhaps,  are  ready  to  ask,  Why 
did  not  the  founders  of  the  Cumberland 
Presbyterian  Church  join  the  Baptist 
Church? 

Why  this  denomination  took  the  name 
Baptist  is  rather  curious.  If  it  has  any 
significance,  it  is  because  those  who  bear 
that  name  baptize;  but  then  all  other 
Churches  baptize,  too,  and  for  this  reason 
we  fail  to  see  why  that  name  was  selected, 
unless  it  is  because  they  attach  very 
great,  if  not  undue,  importance  to  that 
ordinance. 

I. — THE    ORIGIN   OF    THIS    CHURCH. 

•     Our     Baptist     friends — at    least     the 
greater  portion  of  them — claim  that  they 


134  THE   BAPTIST    CHURCH. 

are  not  only  the  oldest  Church  in  exist- 
ence, but  that  they  are  the  true  Church. 
Its  origin,  we  are  told,  dates  back  to 
John  the  Baptist;  and  the  Baptist 
Church  of  to-day  professes  to  be  able  to 
show  that  it  has  a  "regular  succession" 
from  the  apostles  themselves — that  there 
has  never  been  a  time,  since  Christ  was 
upon  earth,  in  which  their  doctrines  and 
usages  were  not  held  and  practiced.  But 
this  is  a  great  mistake — is  simply  an  as- 
sumption. 

Dr.  Wall,  a  historian  that  every  one 
respects,  in  his  work  on  Infant  Baptism, 
written  in  1705,  in  speaking  of  the  Bap- 
tist Church,  says:  "In  England  there 
were  now  and  then  some  Dutchmen 
found  of  the  Anabaptist  opinion  ever 
since  it  had  taken  footing  in  Holland, 
but  none  of  the  English  nation  are 
known  to  have  embraced  it  in  a  long 
time  after."  He  also  quotes  from  Bishop 
Jewel,   who   says:    "They  have  no  ac- 


THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH.  135 

quaintance  with  us,  either  in  England, 
Germany,  France,  Scotland,  Denmark, 
Sweden,  nor  in  any  place  else  where  the 
gospel  is  clearly  preached." 

Rev.  Robert  Hall,  one  of  the  most 
prominent  ministers  the  Baptist  Church 
ever  produced,  yields  the  point;  for,  in 
speaking  of  a  separate  and  distinct  Bap- 
tist Church  in  early  history,  ho  says: 
''  Of  this  not  the  faintest  trace  or  vestige 
is  to  be  found  in  ecclesiastical  history. 
Not  the  shadow  of  evidence  can  be  pro- 
duced to  prove  the  existence,  during  that 
long  trace  of  time,  of  a  single  Society  of 
which  adult  baptism  was  the  distinguish- 
ing characteristic.  Indeed,  we  read  of 
the  separate  existence  of  no  Baptist 
Churches  anywhere  upon  the  Continent 
during  the  whole  period  of  the  Middle 
Ages.'' 

A  large  amount  of  additional  testi- 
mony on  this  point  could  be  presented, 
but  the  foregoing  is  sufficient,  especially 


136  THE   BAPTIST    CHURCH. 

when  we  remember  that  the  greater  por- 
tion of  it  is  from  Baptist  authority. 

From  the  most  reliable  information 
we  can  get,  we  learn  that  the  Baptist 
Church  originated  in  Germany,  about 
the  year  1522;  and  the  evidence,  too,  is 
that  they  came  from  the  Anabaptists,  an 
organization  that  took  its  name  from 
two  Greek  words  ana^  "new,"  and  Bajp- 
tistes,  a  "Baptist,"  signifying  that  those 
baptized  in  infancy  should  be  baptized 
anew.  The  Church  was,  then,  formed 
out  of  a  people  who  had  once  believed 
in  and  practiced  infant  baptism!  The 
origin  of  the  Baptist  Church  in  the 
United  States,  according  to  Benedict,  a 
Baptist  historian,  was  as  follows :  "  Koger 
Williams,  the  founder  of  the  first  Baptist 
Church  in  America,  was  born  in  Wales, 
in  1598.  He  landed  in  America,  Febru- 
ary 5,  1630.  He  settled  at  Providence, 
1636;  and,  in  1639,  he  was  baptized  by 
Ezekiel   Holliman,  a  layman,   who   was 


THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH.  137 

appointed  by  the  little  company  for  that 
purpose.  Then  he  (Roger  Williams) 
baptized  the  rest  of  the  company,  and 
tlius  laid  the  foundation  for  the  first  Bap- 
tist Church  in  Providence,  and  on  the 
American  continent.  Some  of  our  wri- 
ters have  taken  the  pains  to  apologize 
tor  this  unusual  transaction;  but,  in  my 
opinion,  it  was  just  such  a  course  as  all 
companies  of  believers  who  wish  to  form 
a  Church  in  such  extraordinary  circum- 
stances should  pursue." 

The  reader  must  not  forget  that,  ac- 
cording to  the  theory  generally  held  by 
Baptists,  there  is  no  "gospel  ministry 
except  an  immersed  and  an  immersing 
ministry;"  consequently,  Mr.  HoUiman, 
as  he  had  not  been  immersed,  had  no 
authority  to  immerse  Mr.  Williams,  and 
the  whole  thing,  according  to  their  own 
theory,  must  be  null  and  void.  Yet, 
according  to  this  same  historian — Mr. 
Benedict — the  Church   which  was  thus 


138  THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH. 

organized  was  the  only  one  out  of  which 
a  vast  number  of  other  Baptist  Churches 
sprang;  for,  says  he,  "It  would  be  diffi- 
cult at  this  day  to  make  a  complete  list 
of  the  Baptist  communities  which  have 
sprung  from  this  ancient  and  prolific 
mother.  From  it  probably  originated; 
in  early  times,  all  which  arose  in  tRe 
iN'orthern  part  of  the  State.  This  Church 
shot  out  into  divers  branches  as  the 
members  increased."  Surely,  to  say  the 
least,  there  is  no  "succession"  in  this! 

II. NO    BAPTISM    BUT    IMMERSION. 

The  Baptist  Church  claims  that  there 
is  no  authority  in  the  Bible  for  adminis- 
tering the  ordinance  of  baptism  in  any 
other  way  than  by  immersion.  This  i& 
a  bold  position — a  position,  too,  which 
cannot  be  maintained. 

All  orthodox  Churches  agree  that 
water  baptism  is  a  symbol,  and  shadows 
forth    the    purifying    operations   of    the 


THE   BAPTIST    CHURCH.  139 

flolj  Spirit.  Is  it  not  reasonable,  then, 
that  the  mode  should  correspond  to  the 
manner  in  which  the  Divine  Spirit  is 
represented  as  descending  upon  the  heart? 
But  this  is  uniformly  bj  pouring  or 
sprinkling.  "I  will  pour  out  my  Spirit 
unto  you."  "I  will  sprinkle  clean  water 
upon  you,  and  ye  shall  be  clean."  This 
"pouring  out"  of  the  Spirit  is  called  in 
Scripture  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
and  water  baptism  is  the  instituted  sign 
of  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  It 
would,  therefore,  seem  evident  that  pour- 
ing or  sprinkling  is  the  proper  mode  of 
water  baptism. 

1.  Baptism  of  John  the  Baptist. — We 
are  told  by  those  who  believe  in  immer- 
sion that  John  "baptized  in  Jordan." 
But  does  not  the  same  record  say  that  he 
baptized  "  in  Bethabara  beyond  Jordan  ? " 
Bethabara,  as  we  all  know,  was  a  place, 
not  a  river.  The  whole  trouble  arises 
from  the  use  of  the  little  Greek   word 


140  THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH. 

e?7,  which  means  "on,"  "by,"  "near," 
"  with,"  etc.,  as  well  as  "m."  Hence  we 
can  with  as  much  propriety  say  that 
John  baptized  "at"  or  "near"  Jordan, 
as  that  he  baptized  "in"  Jordan.  The 
Bible  says  that  "Jesus  went  up  (eis)  into 
a  mountain."  But  did  he  go  under  the 
mountain?  Peter  says,  "When  we  were 
with  him  (Christ)  in  [en)  the  holy  mount." 
But  were  they  under  the  ground?  When, 
therefore,  it  is  said  that  a  person  is  bap- 
tized "in"  a  stream,  does  it  mean  neces- 
sarily that  he  was  put  under  the  water? 
By  no  means. 

Our  Baptist  friends  tell  us,  however, 
that  when  Christ  himself  was  baptized, 
he  "went  straightway  up  out  of  the 
water."  The  trouble  here  is  caused  by 
the  little  Greek  word  "a^^o,"  which 
means  ^^from''  as  well  as  '^out  of.''  No 
one,  then,  is  authorized  to  say  that  Christ 
was  immersed. 

2.  Baptism  on  the  Day  of  Pentecost. — 


THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH.  141 

By  reference  to  Acts  ii.  1-15,  we  learn 
that  three  thousand  persons,  from  at  least 
fifteen  different  nations,  were  baptized 
on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  after  nine 
o'clock  in  the  morning.  To  do  this, 
there  were  eleven  preachers,  and  if  they 
had  done  nothing  else  from  the  hour 
specified  until  sundown,  they  would  have 
had  to  h'di^t\ze  Jive  pei  ^ons  every  minute! 
Is  it  possible  to  have  immersed  that  num- 
ber in  so  short  a  time?  'No,  indeed. 
There  was  no  stream  there  in  which  to 
immerse  them,  except  the  little  brook 
Kedron,  which  was  to  the  East  of  Jeru- 
salem; and  the  time  when  it  occurred 
was  midsummer,  when  not  only  this 
stream  was  low,  but  when  also  the  pools 
and  cisterns  of  the  city  were  scantily 
supplied  with  water.  Besides,  who  for 
a  moment  will  believe  that  the  citizens 
would  have  permitted  the  apostles  to 
use  their  pools  and  cisterns  for  such  a 
purpose?      They  had  just  crucified  the 


142  THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH. 

Saviour,  and  of  course  they  were  iu  no 
condition  to  accommodate  his  followers, 
whom  they  so  detested  and  hated.  More- 
over, the  people  who  were  baptized  were 
visitors — perhaps  had  not  a  change  of 
raiment.  Then,  if  they  were  immersed, 
they  remained  during  the  day  with  their 
wet  clothing  upon  them !  Has  God  in- 
stituted an  ordinance  which  subjects  his 
followers  to  such  inconvenience  and  to 
such  exposure?  Surely  not.  The  three 
thousand,  then,  must  have  been  baptized 
by  sjmnkling  or  pouriyig,  as  was  predicted 
by  the  prophet  Ezekiel:  "I  will  sprinkle 
clean  water  upon  you,  and  ye  shall  be 
clean." 

3.  The  Baptism  of  the  Eunuch. — The 
reader  is  requested  to  turn  to  Acts  viii. 
26-39,  and  read  this  interesting  case  with 
care.  Philip,  as  will  be  seen,  was  going 
from  Jerusalem  to  Gaza,  and  every  one 
who  has  studied  geography  closely, 
knows  that  there  are  no  streams  of  any 


THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH.  143 

size  in  that  region.  So  destitute  is  it  of 
water  that  it  is  called  "desert."  (See 
latter  clause  of  verse  26.)  The  record, 
however,  is  as  follows:  -'And  he  com- 
manded the  chariot  to  stand  still:  and 
they  went  down  both  into  the  water, 
both  Philip  and  the  eunuch;  and  he 
baptized  him."  Here  is  another  case 
similar  to  the  one  which  has  already 
been  considered — the  same  little  words 
"eis,"  "e^,"  "(2/90," — and  every  scholar 
knows  that  it  would  be  just  as  correct  to 
say  they  "went  down  both  to  the  water," 
as  to  say,  "  into  the  water;"  and  it  would 
likewise  be  as  correct  to  say  (verse  39), 
"And  when  they  were  come  upfront  the 
water,"  as  to  say,  '-out  of  the  water." 
To  prove  this,  take  the  case  of  Saul,  on 
his  way  to  Damascus.  When  the  light 
shone  around  him,  he  fell  (eis)  to  the 
ground — not  into  the  ground.  Hence,  if 
we  must  say  that  Philip  and  the  eunuch 
went  down  into  the  water,  we  must  say 


144  THE    BAPTIST    CHUKCH. 

that  Saul  fell  into  the  ground,  for  it  is 
precisely  the  same  word  in  both  cases. 
Again,  in  John  xxi.  9,  we  have  these 
words:  "As  soon  as  they  were  (eis)  to 
land,"  not  into  the  land — the  same 
word  in  both  cases.  Take  one  more 
case.  The  Saviour  commanded  Peter  to 
go  (eis)  to  the  sea,  and  cast  a  hook  and 
take  the  first  fish  that  came  up.  Did 
Peter  go  (eis)  into  the  sea?  Not  so;  but 
he  went  to  the  sea.  Hence  Philip  and  the 
eunuch  went  to  the  water,  not  into  the 
water;  and  we  firmly  believe  that  Philip 
sprinkled  or  poured  the  water  upon  him. 
4.  The  Baptism  of  Saul. — The  reader 
will  find  a  history  of  Saul's  conversion 
and  baptism  in  Acts  ix.  At  the  eigh- 
teenth verse  of  the  same  chapter  we  have 
these  words:  "And  immediately  there 
fell  from  his  eyes  as  it  had  been  scales; 
and  he  received  sight  forthwith,  and 
arose,  and  was  baptized."  In  the  original 
Greek,  as  every  scholar  knows,  the  Ian- 


THE   BAPTIST   CHURCH.  145 

guage  is,  ''Having  risen  up  (or  standing 
up),  he  was  baptized" — baptized,  too,  in 
the  very  house  in  which  he  professed  re- 
ligion. ITow,  in  the  name  of  reason  and 
common  sense,  how  could  Saul  have  been 
immersed?  Our  Baptist  friends  feel  that 
this  is  a  strong  case,  and  they  endeavor 
to  meet  it  by  saying,  thej^  might  have 
gone  oft*  to  a  stream,  or  there  might  have 
been  a  pool  of  water  in  the  house. 
"  Might  have  gone !"  "  might  have  been  !" 
Both  suppositions  are  unreasonable,  not 
to  say  absurd;  and  no  man  can,  by  any 
fair  argument,  get  a  case  of  immersion 
out  of  it.  The  language  is;  ''He  arose, 
and  was  baptized" — baptized  just  where 
he  was  when  he  arose. 

5.  The  Baptism  of  Cornelius. — The 
history  of  this  case  is  found  in  Acts  x» 
From  the  forty-fourth  to  the  forty- 
seventh  verse  inclusive,  we  have  the  fol- 
lowing: "While  Peter  yet  spake  these 
words,  the  Holy  Ghost  fell  on  all  them 
10 


146  THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH. 

which  Vieard  the  word.  And  they  of  the 
cireurucisioD  which  believed  were  aston- 
ished, as  many  as  came  with  Peter,  be- 
cause that  on  the  Gentiles  also  was 
poured  out  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 
For  they  heard  them  speak  with  tongues, 
and  magnify  God.  Then  answered  Pe- 
ter, Can  any  man  forbid  water,  that 
these  should  not  be  baptized,  which  have 
received  the  Holy  Ghost  as  well  as  we?" 
These  words  can  mean  nothing,  unless 
they  mean  that  water  should  he  procured 
and  poured  upon  them,  just  as  the  Holy 
Ghost  had  been  ^^ poured  out.''  If  any 
one  doubts  that  this  was  the  meaning 
of  Peter,  let  him  read  the  fifteenth  verse 
of  the  next  chapter — chapter  xi.  lu 
speaking  of  this  same  affair,  Peter  says; 
"  The  Holy  Ghost  fell  on  them,  as  on  us 
at  the  beginning.  Then  remembered  I 
the  word  of  the  Lord,  how  that  he  said, 
John  indeed  baptized  with  water  (not  in 
water) ;  but  ye  shall  be  baptized  with  the 


THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH.  147 

Holy  Ghost."  In  other  words,  Petei 
baptized  them  with  water,  just  as  God 
had  baptized  them  with  the  Holy  Ghost. 
There  is  not  the  shadow  of  evidence  that 
.  they  were  immersed. 

6.  The  Baptism  of  the  Jailer. — In  Acts, 
chapter  xvi.,  we  have  a  full  history  of 
the  baptism  of  the  jailer  and  his  family. 
The  thirty-third  verse  reads  as  follows: 
"And  he  (the  jailer)  took  them  (Paul 
and  Silas)  the  same  hour  of  the  night 
(midnight)  and  washed  their  stripes ;  and 
was  baptized,  he  and  all  his,  straight- 
way." 

I^ow  let  us  calmly  look  at  the  facts  in 
this  case.  Paul  and  Silas  had  been  put 
in  jail.  That  prison  had  three  depart- 
ments, the  inner  and  outer  prison  and  the 
jailer's  room,  the  latter  occupied  by  him 
iind  his  family.  When  Paul  and  Silas 
were  delivered  to  the  jailer,  he  was  posi- 
tively instructed  to  "keep  them  safely;" 
and,  to   secure   them    well,    he    "thrust 


148  THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH. 

them  into  the  inner  prison,  and  made 
their  feet  fast  in  the  stocks."  At  mid- 
night Paul  and  Silas  prayed  and  sang 
praises,  and  suddenly  a  great  earthquake 
came,  and  the  prison  doors  flew  open. 
The  jailer  sprang  out  of  hed  and  called 
for  a  light,  for  he  thought  that  the  pris- 
oners had  fled.  In  his  excitement,  he 
determined  to  take  his  own  life;  but 
Paul  cried  with  a  loud  voice,  "Do  thy- 
self no  harm,  for  we  are  all  here."  The 
jailer  then  fell  at  the  feet  of  Paul  and 
Silas,  and  in  deep  contrition  of  soul,  he 
cried,  "Sirs,  what  must  I  do  to  be 
saved?" 

Now  the  question  is.  By  what  mode 
were  the  jailer  and  his  household  bap- 
tized? One  thing  is  certain,  they  were 
baptized  m  the  jail.  Paul  and  Silas  did 
not  leave  the  prison.  They  positively 
refused  to  do  so,  until  the  magistrates 
should  "come  and  fetch  them  out." 
Then,  as  the  baptism  took  place  in  the 


THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH.  149 

jail,  do  we  not  see  at  a  glance  that  it 
could  not  have  been  by  immersion?  How 
could  it  have  been  by  immersion?  It 
was  a  heathen  jail,  and,  of  course,  there 
was  no  arrangement  in  it  for  immersion. 
The  fact  is,  there  is  not  the  shadow  of 
proof  that  these  parties  were  immersed, 
and  it  is  absurd  and  ridiculous  to  so 
contend. 

7.  Buried  with  Christ  in  Baptism. — In 
Romans  vi.  3,  4,  we  have  the  following: 
^'So  many  of  us  as  were  baptized  into 
Jesus  Christ  were  baptized  into  his  death : 
therefore  we  are  buried  with  him  by 
baptism  into  death."  We  also  read  in 
Col.  ii.  12:  "Buried  with  him  in  bap- 
tism." Our  Baptist  friends  think  that 
these  scriptures  are  unanswerable — that 
they  mean  nothing,  unless  they  mean 
immersion!  The  truth  is,  they  have  no 
reference  whatever  to  the  mode  of  bap- 
tism. The  meaning  is  that  when  we  are 
baptized,  we,  by  that  act,  show  our  faith 


150  THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH. 

in  his  death— the  efficacy  of  his  death; 
hence,  we  are  ''baptized  into  his  death." 
The  expression,  "buried  with  him  by 
baptism  into  death,"  simply  means  that, 
by  baptism,  we  thereby  declare  ourselves 
to  be  as  dead  to  the  love  of  sin  as  if  we 
were  buried  in  the  grave.  The  leading 
idea  in  this  matter  then  is  a  spiritual  bap- 
tism; and  being  "baptized  into  his 
death,"  and  "buried  with  him  by  bap- 
tism into  death,"  mean  that  by  our  bap- 
tism we  attest  our  faith  in  his  death,  and 
that,  having  taken  that  stand,  we  are 
likewise,  dead  unto  sin.  Those,  there- 
tore,  who  contend  that  there  is  no  bap- 
tism but  immersion  in  these  passages, 
are  welcome  to  all  the  immersion  that 
can  be  obtained  from  them. 

Having  examined  with  care  the  several 
cases  of  baptism  mentioned  in  the  'New 
Testament,  and  having  failed  to  find  a 
single  instance  in  which  immersion  was 
practiced,  we  are  prepared  to  say   that 


THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH.  151 

our  Baptist  friends  are  widely  mistaken 
when  they  assert  that  the  only  scriptural 
mode  of  baptism  is  by  immersion. 

In  conclusion  upon  this  point,  may 
we  not  say  that  it  does  not  seem  reason- 
able that  God  would  require  compliance 
with  an  ordinance  which  could  not  be 
performed  at  all  times.  IIow  difficult 
to  administer  baptism  by  immersion  in 
the  frigid  zones!  How  difficult,  too,  in 
vast  deserts!  IIow  inconvenient  to  a 
person  that  may  embrace  religion  upon 
a  dying  bed !  Is  it  not  true  that  in  every 
case  of  adult  baptism  mentioned  in  the 
New  Testament,  the  parties  were  bap- 
tized at  the  place  where,  and  at  the  time 
when,  they  professed  religion?  IN'ot  a 
single  instance  is  given  of  delay,  nor  of 
going  off  to  seek  water. 

ni. — INFANT   BAPTISM. 

Another  objection  to  the  Baptist 
Church  is  that  it  denies  to  the  children 


152  THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH. 

of  Christian  parents  membership  in  the 
Church  of  Christ. 

[N'ow,  every  Bible  reader  will  admit 
that,  in  all  the  covenants  which  God  has 
ever  made  with  men,  children  have  been 
embraced.  Thus  it  was  with  the  cove- 
nant made  with  Adam,  with  ]N"oah,  and 
with  Abraham.  The  covenant  made 
with  Abraham  was,  in  some  respects,  a 
peculiar  one.  It  not  only  embraced 
temporal  and  spiritual  blessings,  but  it 
contemplated  an  organization  into  which 
Abraham  and  his  descendants  were  to 
be  gathered.  This  covenant  is  spoken 
of  in  the  Old  Testament  (Gen.  xvii.  7) 
as  ''everlasting,"  and  in  the  ITew  Testa- 
ment (Luke  i.  55),  as  to  endure  "forever." 
It  is  represented  by  Paul  as  a  covenant 
of  "promise,"  and  as  "confirmed  of 
God  in  Christ."  Believers  under  the 
gospel  dispensation  are  spoken  of  as 
children  of  the  covenant  with  Abraham. 
— Acts  iii.  25.      And    because   of  their 


THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH.  153 

interest  in  this  covenant,  they  are  de- 
nominated "Abraham's  seed." — Gal.  iii. 
29.  For  the  same  reason,  Abraham  is 
represented  as  "the  father  of  all  them 
that  believe."  Inasmuch,  then,  as  this 
covenant  is  called  an  "everlasting"  cove- 
nant, and  one  to  endure  "forever";  and 
inasmuch  as  it  has  been  "confirmed  of 
■God  in  Christ,"  and  inasmuch,  too,  as 
Abraham  is  called  "the  father  of  all 
them  that  believe,"  we  ask  the  question, 
Was  not  the  organization  of  which  we 
have  just  spoken  a  Church?  It  must 
have  been,  for,  from  the  time  that  cove- 
nant was  made,  God  spoke  of  Abraham 
and  his  descendants  as  Ms  people.  He 
directed  Moses  to  saj  to  Pharaoh :  "  Thus 
saith  the  Lord,  Let  my  people  go  that 
they  may  serve  me." — Ex.  viii.  1.  Again: 
"Thus  saith  the  Lord,  My  people  went 
down  aforetime  into  Egypt,  to  sojourn 
there." — Isa.  Iii.  4. 

If,  then,  this  was  not  a  Church,  there 


154  THE    BAPTIST    CIIURCU. 

is  no  Church,  nor  has  there  ever  been 
one.  A  careful  examination  of  the  seven- 
teenth chapter  of  Genesis,  however,  will 
convince  every  unprejudiced  reader  that 
there  and  then  the  Church  was  first  or- 
ganized. We  also  see  in  the  same  chap- 
ter who  were  to  be  members  of  that 
Church — believing  parents  and  their 
children.  Then  and  there,  Paul  says 
(Rom.  iv.  11),  "He  (Abraham)  received 
the  sign  of  circumcision,  a  seal  of  the 
righteousness  of  the  faith  which  he  had^ 
yet  being  uncircumcised:  that  he  might 
he  the  father  of  all  them  that  believe.'^ 
Into  this  Church  Abraham  admitted  his- 
children  by  the  express  command  of 
God;  and  into  that  Church,  during  the 
entire  Old  Testament  dispensation,  chil- 
dren were  permitted  to  enter.  No  one 
will  dare  deny  this  statement.  If,  then^ 
God  permitted  children,  for  more  than 
two  thousand  years,  to  be  members  of 
his  Churcli,  why  would  he  not  continue 


THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH.  155 

to  do  SO?  Those  who  oppose  infant 
membership,  however,  tell  us  that  the 
organization  of  which  we  have  spoken 
was  not  a  Church.  But  the  Bible  says  it 
was.  "This  is  he"  (speaking  of  Moses) 
"that  was  in  the  Church  in  the  wilder- 
ness."— Acts  vii.  38. 

As  has  been  stated,  children  were  per- 
mitted to  enter  this  Church,  nor  will  any 
one  deny  the  fact.  But  we  are  told  that 
when  the  Saviour  made  his  appearance 
upon  earth,  he  organized  a  new  Church, 
and  that  from  that  time  forth  a  different 
policy  prevailed.  Is  it  a  fact  that  Christ 
organized  a  Church  ?  If  so,  when .?  and 
where?  'Bo  mortal  on  earth  can  show 
that  he  did.  On  the  contrary,  he  was, 
when  a  child,  made  a  member  of  the 
same  Church  that  was  organized  in  the 
family  of  Abraham;  was  put  into  that 
Church,  just  as  all  other  children  had 
been,  by  the  rite  of  circumcision.  "And 
when  eight  days  were  accomplished  for 


156  THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH. 

the  circumcising  of  the  child,  his  name 
was  called  Jesus,  which  was  so  named 
of  the  angel  before  he  was  conceived  lu 
the  womb." — Luke  ii.  21.  In  this  Church 
the  Saviour  lived  and  died — never 
uttered  one  word  about  organizing  a  new 
one.  l^either  did  John  the  Baptist,  nor 
any  one,  nor  all,  of  the  apostles,  do  such 
a  thing.  If  so,  let  it  be  shown.  Do  we 
not  know,  too,  that  if  the  Saviour  had 
intimated  that  children  were  to  be  ex- 
cluded, the  whole  Jewish  nation  would 
have  complained  most  bitterly?  Yet, 
not  one  word  of  complaint  do  we  hear. 
He,  it  is  true,  changed  some  of  the  or- 
dinances— put  baptism  in  the  place  of 
circumcision,  and  the  sacrament  of  the 
Supper  in  the  place  of  the  feast  of  the 
Passover — but  he  organized  no  Church, 
nor  did  he  in  the  least  interfere  with  in- 
fant membership.  On  the  contrary,  he 
said,  ''  Suffer  little  children  to  come  unto 
me,  and  forbid  them  not;  for  of  such  is 


THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH.  157 

the  kingdom  of  God." — Mark  x.  14, 
Thank  God  for  the  expression,  little 
children ! 

But  Paul  forever  settles  the  question 
as  to  whether  or  not  there  has  ever  been 
but  one  Church — the  Church  organized 
in  the  days  of  Abraham.  In  speaking 
of  the  Gentile  believers,  he  represents 
them  as  grafted  into  the  same  olive  tree 
from  which  the  Jews,  for  their  unbelief, 
were  broken  off,  and  into  which  the  con- 
verted Jews  shall  be  grafted  again. — 
Rom.  xi.  17.  Could  language  be  plainer? 
The  Church  of  God  is  represented  under 
the  figure  of  an  olive  tree.  From  this 
tree  many  of  the  Jews,  because  of  unbe- 
lief, were  broken  off;  but  into  this  same 
grand  old  olive  tree — the  Church  of 
Abraham — all  the  Gentiles  who  embrace 
Christ  shall  be  grafted.  As  the  Church, 
then,  under  the  ]N"ew  Testament  dispen- 
sation is  the  same  as  the  Church  undei 
the  Old  Testament  dispensation,  and  as 


158  THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH.  . 

children  were  admitted  into  tlie  Church 
before  the  birth  of  Christ,  who  will  dare 
say  that  they  should  not  be  admitted 
after  the  birth  of  Christ?  If,  then,  chil- 
dren, as  well  as  grown  persons,  were  re- 
ceived into  the  Church,  must  they  not 
have  been  admitted  into  it  by  the  same 
ordinance  in  which  their  parents  were? 
Under  the  old  dispensation  that  ordi- 
nance was  circumcision^  under  the  new 
it  is  baptism.  That  they  were  admitted 
into  the  Church  in  both  dispensations, 
we  have  abundant  proof.  Then  have 
we  not  established  beyond  the  possibility 
of  doubt  the  doctrine  of  Infant  Baptism? 
That  they  were  baptized,  the  ISTew  Testa- 
ment clearly  teaches,  for  in  the  four  in- 
stances mentioned  (Acts  xvi.  14,  32;  1 
Cor.  i.  16)  of  Gentile  baptisms,  household 
baptism  is  expressly  declared  in  three, 
and  strongly  implied  in  the  fourth. 
Would  it  not  be  strange  if  there  were 
no  children  in  any  of  these  household  ])ap- 


THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH.  159 

t^srns?  A.gain,  those  who  immediately 
succeeded  the  apostles,  baptized  parenta 
and  their  children.  Origen,  the  great 
historian,  whose  father,  grandfather,  and 
great  grandfather  were  Christians  (going 
clear  back  to  the  days  of  the  apostles 
themselves),  says  that  they  obtained  the 
<'Ustom  of  baptizing  infants  from  the 
apostles.  Cyprian,  who  lived  in  the 
same  usie  with  Origen,  says  that  "  sixty- 
six  Bishops,  being  convened  in  a  council 
at  Cartha2:e,  having  the  question  referred 
to  them,  whether  infanis  might  be  bap- 
tized before  they  were  eight  days  old, 
decided  unanimously  that  no  infant  ia 
to  be  prohibited  from  the  benefit  of  bap- 
tism, although  but  just  born."  Augus- 
tine and  Pelagius  say  that  they  never 
heard  of  anyone,  orthodox  or  heretic, 
who  denied  baptism  to  children. 

A  large  amount  of  additional  evidence 
could  be  given,  but  surely  this  is  suffi- 
cient.    It  is,  therefore,   preposterous  to 


160  THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH. 

deny  to  children  a  place  in  the  Church, 
for  thej  have  done  nothing  to  forfeit  that 
right. 

IV. — CLOSE    COMMUNION. 

Another  objection  to  our  Baptist- 
friends  is,  they  will  not  permit  any  one 
not  a  member  of  their  Church  to  com- 
mune with  them,  nor  do  they  allow  theii 
members  to  commune  with  others.  Ho\v 
such  a  practice  or  rule  ever  gained  a 
foothold  in  this  Church,  we  are  utterly 
at  a  loss  to  even  conjecture.  With  them 
the  test  for  communion  is  membership 
in  the  Baptist  Church.  It  is  not  immer 
sion,  for  they  will  not  allow  an  immerseo. 
member  of  any  other  denomination  to 
commune  with  them.  ITor  is  it  regen- 
eration or  the  "  new  birth,"  for  they  ad- 
mit that  there  are  Christians  in  all  other 
Churches.  Hence  membership  in  their 
Church  must  be  the  test  of  communion ! 
The  Bible,  however,  authorizes  no  such 


THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH.  161 

a  test.  It  says:  "Let  a  man  examine 
himself."  It  does  not  say,  Let  the 
preacher  or  the  Church  examine  him,  but, 
"Let  a  man  examine  himself,  and  so  let 
him  eat  of  that  bread,  and  drink  of  that 
cup."— 1  Cor.  xi.  28.  What  a  fearful 
responsibility,  then,  must  a  minister  as- 
sume when  he  refuses  the  sacrament  of 
the  Supper  to  all  Christians  who  do  not 
belong  to  his  Church,  and  does  so,  too, 
because  they  do  not !  How  inconsistent 
is  the  course  of  our  Baptist  friends! 
They  will  sing,  and  pray,  and  preach, 
and  rejoice  with  the  members  and  min- 
isters of  other  Churches,  but  will  not 
take  the  sacrament  with  them!  The 
blessed  Saviour  has  said  to  all  his  fol- 
lowers, "Do  this  in  remembrance  of 
me."  "As  oft  as  ye  do  this,  ye  shew 
forth  the  Lord's  death  until  he  comes."' 
The  design  of  this  feast,  therefore,  is  to- 
show  our  love  to  Christ  and  our  interest 
in  his  death.  Do  not  all  Christians  love- 
11 


162  THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH. 

him?  and  have  not  all  Christians  an  in- 
terest in  his  death  ? 

The  Bible  authorizes  us  to  believe  that 
this  sacrament  is  administered  in  heaven. 
The  Saviour  said  to  his  disciples,  "I  will 
not  any  more  drink  of  the  fruit  of  the 
vine,  until  I  drink  it  new  with  you  in 
my  Father's  kingdom."  Wonder  if  all 
Christians  do  not  sit  down  together 
around  that  communion  table  in  heaven  ? 
If,  then,  they  commune  together  in 
heaven,  why  should  they  not  commune 
together  upon  earth?  Away  with  the 
doctrine  of  close  communion  I 

v. FORM    OF    CHURCH    GOVERNIVIENT. 

In  the  Baptist  Church,  each  congrega- 
tion is  independent  of  the  other.  In 
other  words,  there  are  no  Church  courts 
to  which  these  separate  congregations 
are  responsible.  When  we  read  the 
[N'ew  Testament,  we  see  that  such  was 
not  the  case  in  the  Churches  which  the 


THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH.  163 

apostles  and  their  successors  established, 
far  they  often  met  in  council  to  settle 
questions  of  interest.  These  councils 
were  composed  of  ministers  and  elders, 
and  they  exercised  authority  over  these 
congregations.  Acts  xv.  5,  6,  19,  20: 
^^But  there  rose  up  certain  of  the  sect 
of  the  Pharisees  which  believed,  saying, 
that  it  was  needful  to  circumcise  them, 
and  to  command  them  to  keep  the  law 
of  Moses.  And  the  apostles  and  elders 
came  together  for  to  consider  this  mat- 
ter." "Wherefore  my  sentence  is,  that 
we  trouble  not  them,  which  from  among 
the  Gentiles  are  turned  to  God:  but  that 
we  write  unto  them,  that  they  abstain 
from  pollutions  of  idols,  and  from  forni- 
cation, and  from  things  strangled,  and 
from  blood."  The  verses  just  quoted, 
show  conclusively  that  this  meeting  of 
"  apostles  and  elders "  legislated  for  the 
separate  congregations,  and  they  also 
show  that  these  separate  congregations 


164  THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH. 

were  expected  to  obey  the  instructious 
wMch  were  given.  Many  similar  in- 
stances could  be  cited,  but  it  is  not 
nec3ssary  to  do  so.  The  truth  is,  Church 
government  is  just  as  necessary  as  civil 
government.  What  would  become  of 
this  country,  or  of  any  other  country,  if 
each  county  or  locality  were  to  "set  up" 
for  itself?     The  very  idea  is  absurd! 

Though  our  Baptist  friends  disclaim 
all  Church  government  except  congrega- 
tional, yet  they  make  that  exceedingly 
rigid  and  severe.  When  a  person  joins 
this  Church,  there  is  no  possible  way  to 
get  out  of  it  honorably,  except  to  die  out 
of  it  I  They  will  not  give  a  letter  of  dis- 
mission to  any  of  their  members,  to  join 
any  other  branch  of  Christ's  Churchy 
and  if  any  of  their  members  were  to  do 
so,  they  would  most  certainly  be  expelled ! 
The  truth  is,  a  letter  of  dismission  in 
the  Baptist  Church  is  conditional — is 
not  worth  the  paper   upon    which  it  i& 


THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH.  165 

written,  unless  the  one  who  has  it,  pre- 
sents it  to  a  Church  of  the  "same  faith 
and  order."  In  no  other  Church  in 
Christendom,  except  the  Roman  Catho- 
lic Church,  do  we  find  such  illiberality, 
not  to  say  tyranny,  in  this  respect. 

From  the  foregoing,  therefore,  we  are 
not  astonished  that  the  founders  of  the 
Cumberland  Presbyterian  Church  did 
not  join  the  Baptist  Church. 


166      THE  METHODIST  CHURCH. 


CHAPTER  XI. 

THE    METHODIST    CHURCH. 

The  Methodist  Church  received  its 
name  from  the  following  circumstance: 
A  number  of  young  men  who  were  at- 
tending college  in  England,  resolved 
that  the}^  would  set  apart  a  certain  day  in 
each  week  for  religious  improvement; 
and  so  regular  and  punctual  were  they 
in  this  respect — so  methodical — that  the 
other  students,  rather  by  way  of  derision 
than  otherwise,  called  the  young  men 
who  were  thus  engaged  Methodists. 

I. — THE    ORIGIN    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

John  Wesley,  who  was  the  prime 
mover  of  the  association  just  spoken  of, 
was  the  founder  of  the  Methodist 
Chui'ch.     He  was  born  at  Epworth,  in 


THE  METHODIST  CHURCH.      1G7 

Lincolnshire,  England,  June  17,  1708. 
Ilis  father  was  a  minister  in  the  Church 
of  England  (the  Episcopal  Church),  and 
John  was  ordained  a  minister  in  the 
same  Church  by  Dr.  Potter,  then  Bishop 
of  Oxford,  in  the  autumn  of  1725.  In 
his  early  life  as  a  minister,  he  and  some 
others  came  to  what  is  now  the  State  of 
Georgia,  then  one  of  the  colonies  of 
Great  Britain.  He  commenced  his  la- 
bors at  Savannah,  a  town  in  the  State 
just  mentioned.  In  a  short  time,  how- 
ever, he  became  involved  in  a  church 
difficulty  with  a  Mrs.  Williamson,  who 
was  a  daughter  of  the  chief  magistrate 
of  said  city.  He  refused  to  admit  her  to 
the  communion,  and  for  this  cause  her 
husband  raised  an  action  of  law  against 
him.  Finding  that  Savannah  was  not 
a  suitable  place  for  him,  and,  as  he  said, 
"shaking  the  dust  oft'  his  feet,"  he  re- 
turned to  England,  having  resided  in 
America  not  quite  two  years. 


168  THE   METHODIST   CHURCH. 

On  the  24th  of  May,  1738,  some 
months  after  he  returned  to  England,  he 
attended  a  meeting,  and  while  some  one 
was  reading  Luther's  preface  to  the 
Epistle  to  the  Eomaus,  he  experienced 
such  a  change  of  religious  feelings,  that 
he  ever  afterwards  regarded  it  as  the 
time  of  his  conversion.  This  occurred, 
too,  as  will  be  noticed,  about  ten  years 
after  he  had  been  a  preacher. 

From  this  time  Mr.  Wesley  seemed  to 
redouble  his  zeal;  and,  in  connection 
with  Mr.  Whitefield,  the  great  revivalist, 
he  held  meetings  in  the  open  air,  at 
which  a  large  number  professed  faith  in 
Christ.  He  and  Mr.  Whitefield  soon 
separated,  however,  because  they  dif- 
fered most  materially  in  doctrine — Mr. 
Whitefield  being  a  Calvinist,  and  Mr. 
Wesley  an  Arminian. 

During  the  great  revival  meetings  of 
which  we  have  just  spoken,  Mr.  Wesley 
employed  quite  a  number  of  lay  preachers, 


THE    METHODIST    CHURCH.  169 

as  they  were  called,  men  who  had  not 
been  regularly  inducted  into  the  min- 
istry. The  organizations,  too,  which 
were  formed,  were  called  Societies,  not 
-churches. 

Before  many  years  elapsed,  those  who 
were  identified  with  this  religious  move- 
ment in  England,  sent  their  missionaries, 
Bs  they  might  be  called,  to  America. 
^'Societies"  were  formed  in  this  country, 
and,  through  the  agency  of  Mr.  Wesley, 
a  number  of  men  were  sent  here — such 
men  as  Tiichard  Boardman,  Joseph  Pill- 
more,  Francis  Asbury,  and  Richard 
Wright.  In  the  meantime,  the  War  of 
Independence  in  the  United  States  broke 
-out,  and  all  except  Mr.  Asbury  returned 
home  to  Eno:land  before  the  close  of 
1777;  but  others  of  native  origin  took 
their  places.  Let  the  reader,  however, 
bear  in  mind  that,  up  to  that  time,  there 
was  no  separate  denominational  organi- 
zation of  these  ''Societies"  in  America 


170  THE   METHODIST    CHURCH. 

Having  seen  how  these  "Societies"  were 
brought  into  existence  in  England  and 
America,  let  us  next  examine  and  see 
when  and  how  they  were  formed  into 
churches — denominations. 

From  the  most  reliable  history  at 
command,  we  learn  that  the  "  Wesleyan 
Methodist  Church,"  in  England,  was  or- 
ganized in  1739.  The  theological  system 
(embracing  doctrine  and  government)  was 
prepared  by  Mr.  Wesley;  and  in  1743  he 
drew  up  those  rules  of  his  ''societies," 
which  have  continued  to  be  the  general 
rules  of  the  Methodist  churches,  both  in 
England  and  America,  to  this  day,  with 
scarcely  any  exceptions. 

The  Methodist  Episcopal  Church  in  the 
United  States  was  organized  in  the  city 
of  Baltimore,  Maryland,  in  the  year 
1784.  Mr.  Wesley  was  also  the  founder 
of  this  Church.  As  proof  of  these  as- 
sertions, let  Mr.  Wesley  himself  speak, 
[n  a  letter  addressed  to  Rev.  Mr.  Asbnry,. 


THE    METHODIST    CHURCH.  171 

September  20,  1788,  he  says :  "  You  are 
the  elder  brother  of  the  American  Meth- 
odists; I  am,  under  God,  the  father  of 
the  whole  family." 

I^ow  for  some  points  of  interest  in  re- 
gard to  these  two  Churches  and  their 
founder. 

1.  In  doctrine  they  are  precisely  the 
same — their  creed  being  the  "Thirty- 
Nine  Articles"  of  the  Church  of  England 
(the  Episcopal  Church),  with  modifica- 
tions and  omissions. 

2.  In  government  they  arc  very  dissimi- 
lar—the "Wesleyan  Methodist  Church" 
rejecting  Episcopacy,  and  the  "Metho- 
dist Episcopal  Church  "  adopting  it. 

3.  John  Wesley,  though  he  was  "the 
founder  of  the  whole  family,"  lived 
and  died  in  the  Church  of  England — 
never  did  belong  to  the  Methodist 
Church !  Is  it  not  a  little  curious  that 
a  man  would  bring  into  existence  two 
Churches— yea,  be  the  "founder  of  the 


172      THE  METHODIST  CHURCH. 

whole  family  of  Methodists" — yet  join 
none  of  them? 

Now,  if  the  reader  will  give  close 
attention,  the  method  hy  which  ^^  Ejptsco- 
paci/"  got  into  the  Methodist  Episcopal 
Church  in  the  United  States,  will  be  ex- 
plained; and  that  no  sort  of  injustice 
may  be  done,  the  exact  words  of  Mr. 
Wesley  himself  are  given.     He  says: 

^'Know  all  men  that  I,  John  Wesley^ 
think  myself  to  be  providentially  called 
at  this  time  to  set  apart  some  persons  for 
the  work  of  the  ministry  in  America. 
And,  therefore,  under  the  protection  of 
Almighty  God,  and  with  a  single  eye  to 
his  glory,  I  have  this  day  set  apart  as  a 
Superintendent,  by  the  imposition  of  my 
hands  and  prayer  (being  assisted  by 
other  ordained  ministers),  Thomas  Coke, 
Doctor  of  Civil  Law,  a  Presbyter  of  the 
Church  of  England,  and  a  man  whom  I 
judge  to  be  well  qualified  for  that  great 
work.      And   I   do   hereby    recommend 


THE    METHODIST    CHURCH.  173 

him  to  all  whom  it  may  concern,  as  a  fit 
person  to  preside  over  the  flock  of  Christ. 
In  testimony  whereof,  I  have  hereunto  set 
my  hand  and  seal,  this  second  day  of 
September,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one 
thousand  seven  hundred  and  eighty-four. 
John  Wesley." 

It  is  also  a  matter  of  historical  fact, 
that  Dr.  Coke,  when  the  matter  was  first 
suggested  to  him  by  Mr.  Wesley,  "was 
startled  at  a  measure  so  unprecedented," 
but,  after  two  months'  deliberation,  he 
consented.  This  occurred  in  1784,  when, 
too,  Mr.  Wesley  was  eighty-one  years  old. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  the  office  to 
which  Mr.  Wesley  ordained  Dr.  Coke, 
was  that  of  "  Superintendent ^  iSTow  the 
question  is,  what  did  Mr.  Wesley  mean 
by  the  word  Superintendent  f  Did  he. 
mean  Bishop?  He  says  most  positively 
that  he  did  not;  and  that  the  reader 
may  know  just  what  he  did  say,  w^e  give 
his  own  words : 


174  THE   METHODIST    CHURCH. 

"London,  September  20, 1788. 

There  is,  indeed,  a  wide  difference  be- 
tween the  relation  wherein  you  stand  to 
the  Americans,  and  the  relation  wherein 
I  stand  to  all  Methodists.  You  are  the 
elder  brother  of  the  American  Metho- 
dists; I  am,  under  God,  the  father  of  the 
whole  family.  Therefore,  I  naturally 
care  for  you  all,  in  a  manner  no  other 
person  can  do.  Therefore,  I,  in  a  mea- 
sure, provide  for  you  all;  for  the  sup- 
plies which  Dr.  Coke  provides  for  you, 
he  could  not  provide  were  it  not  for 
me — were  it  not  that  I  not  only  permit 
him  to  collect,  but  also  support  him  in 
so  doing. 

But  in  one  point,  my  dear  brother,  I 
am  a  little  afraid  the  Doctor  and  you 
differ  from  me.  I  study  to  be  little,  you 
study  to  be  great;  I  creep,  you  strut 
along.  I  found  a  school,  you  a  college. 
IN'ay,  and  call  it  after  your  own  names! 
O,  beware!     Do  not  seek   to  be  some- 


THE    METHODIST    CHURCH.  175 

thing!     Let  me  be  nothing,  and  Christ 
be  all  in  all. 

One  instance  of  this,  of  your  great- 
ness, has  given  me  great  concern.  How 
can  yon,  how  dare  you,  suffer  yourself  to 
be  called  a  Bishop?  I  shudder,  I  start 
at  the  very  thought.  Men  may  call  me 
a  knave,  or  a  fool,  a  rascal,  a  scoundrel, 
and  I  am  content;  but  they  shall  never, 
by  my  consent,' call  me  a  Bishop!  For 
my  sake,  for  God's  sake,  for  Christ's 
i?ake,  put  a  full  end  to  this!  Let  the 
Presbyterians  do  what  they  please,  but 
let  the  Methodists  know  their  calling 
better. 

Thus,  my    dear  Franky,  I  have  told 
you  all  that  is  in  my  heart,  and  let  this, 
when  I  am  no  more  seen,  bear  witness 
how  sincerely  I  am  your  affectionate 
Friend  and  brother, 

John  Wesley." 

The  foregoing  is  an  exact  copy  of  the 
letter  written   by   Mr.   Wesley  to  Rev. 


176  THE    METHODIST    CHUECH. 

Francis  Asburj,  who  was  then  filling  the 
office  of  Bishop!  Dr.  Coke  had  been  or- 
dained by  Mr.  Wesley  as  "  Superintend- 
ent," and  at  the  organization  of  the 
'•Methodist  Episcopal  Church  in  the 
United  States,"  in  the  city  of  Baltimore, 
Maryland,  December,  1784,  he  and  Mr. 
Asbury  were  unanimously  elected  as 
"General  Superintendents,"  the  latter 
having  received  his  ordination  as  "  Super- 
intendent" from  the  former,  at  the  sug- 
gestion and  by  the  direction  of  Mr. 
Wesley.  In  four  years  afterwards,  as 
the  letter  of  Mr.  Wesley  to  Mr.  Asbury 
shows,  these  men  who  had  been  or- 
dained "Superintendents,"  were  called 
JBishops;  hence  the  severe  reprimand  of 
Mr.  Wesley  in  the  letter  which  we  have 
given. 

As  to  whether  or  not  Mr.  Wesley  in- 
tended to  establish  an  "order"  in  the 
ministry  to  be  called  Bishops,  we  must 
of  course,  accept  his  own  positive  asser- 


THE    METHODIST    CHURCH.  177 

tiou;  bat  that  lie  did  intend  to  establirfh 
an  "order"  clothed  with  the  functions 
of  Bishop,  there  can,  we  think,  be  no 
doubt.  With  him  the  office  of  "  Super- 
intendent" evidently  meant  the  same  as 
that  of  Bishop.  It  was  the  name^  and 
not  the  office,  that  Mr.  Wesley  was  dis- 
pleased with.  He  proposed  to  have  a 
Church  organized  in  America,  and  he 
wished  to  have  it  as  different  from  the 
Church  of  England  in  regard  to  name, 
titles,  etc.,  as  circumstances  would  justif3\ 
For  this  reason,  too,  he  substituted  Elders 
for  Priests — the  second  order  in  the 
ministry.  To  sustain  this  declaration^ 
the  following  reasons  are  assigned: 

1.  Dr.  Coke  himself  so  understood 
the  matter.  Had  he  not  thus  believed,. 
be  would  not  have  been  so  "startled  at  a. 
measure  so  unprecedented,"  etc. 

2.  The  ordination  itself  is  proof 
positive  on  this  point.  Dr.  Coke  was  at 
the  time  of  his  ordination  a  Priest  in  the^ 

•  12 


178  THE    METHODIST    CHURCH. 

ChurcL  of  England — was  in  the  highest 
"order"  of  the  ministry  known  to  that 
Church  except  Bishop.  If  Mr.  Wesley, 
then,  did  not  intend  to  confer  upon  him 
higher  ministerial  functions,  what  on 
earth  could  he  have  meant? 

3.  The  highest  official  authority 
in  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church  in 
the  United  States  has  ever  so  said  and 
declared.  The  exact  language  is,  "The 
General  Conference,  held  at  Baltimore, 
did  unanimously  receive  the  said  Thomas 
Coke  raid  Francis  Asburj^  as  their 
Bishops,  being  fully  satisfied  of  the  va- 
lidity of  their  Episcopal  ordination." 

From  the  foreo^oino^,  it  is  evident  that 
Mr.  Wesley  did  intend  to  create  the  office 
of  Bishop  in  the  ordination  of  Dr.  Coke, 
though  he  gave  it  the  name  of  "  Super- 
intendent." 

Having  seen  how  the  office  of  Bishop 
was  introduced  into  the  Methodist 
Church  in  this  country,  the  next  point 


THE    METHODIST    CHURCH.  179 

of  inquiry  i?,  by  what  aiithorlty  was  it 
thus  introduced?  To  this  r|iiestioii  there 
is  but  one  answer — hy  the  aathority  of  Mr. 
Wesley.  But  where  did  he  get  his  autho- 
rity? Al\\  that  is  the  question!  Mr. 
Wesley,  as  we  have  seen,  was  a  minister 
in  the  Church  of  England — a  Church 
that  recognizes  three  orders  in  the  minis- 
try: Deacon,  Priest,  Bishop.  The  office 
he  hekl  was  that  of  Priest — the  second 
grade — was  never  a  Bishop  in  his  life. 
Yet  he,  as  we  have  proven,  conferred 
upon  Dr.  Coke,  and,  through  him,  upon 
Mr.  Asbury,  the  powers  and  functions  of 
Bishop!  How  could  he  do  such  a  thing? 
Accordino;  to  the  doctrines  and  usa^-es  of 
the  Church  of  England — the  Church  to 
which  he  belonged — it  requires  a  Bishop 
to  make  a  Bishop;  yet,  in  this  case,  a 
Priest  made  a  Bishop!  ISTo  wonder  that 
Dr.  Coke  was  "  startled  at  a  measure  so 
unprecedented."  Some  say  that,  though 
this    was  in   violation   of   the   doctrines 


180  THE    METHODIST    CHURCH. 

and  usages  of  the  Church  of  which  Mr. 
Wesley  was  a  member,  yet  the  Bishops 
which  he  ordained  were  not  for  the 
Church  of  England,  but  for  a  new  Church 
that  was  to  be  organized  in  America, 
Does  that  remedy  the  difficulty?  Kot 
one  particle.  By  what  authority  could 
Mr.  Wesley  ordain  a  Bishop  or  any 
other  officer  for  another  Church?  The 
idea  is  absurd.  It  is  likewise  a  little  cu- 
rious, to  say  the  least  of  it,  that  accord- 
ing to  the  Discipline  of  the  very  Church 
for  which  Mr.  Wesle}^  ordained  Bishops^ 
it  requires  a  Bishop  to  make  a  Bishop. 
(See  Discipline,  page  165,  Chapter  IIL^ 
Section  2.)  Yet  Mr.  Wesley  is  the 
father  of  that  Discipline!  He  then  did 
what  he  would  not  permit  any  one  else 
to  do!  Xo  wonder  that  that  Church, 
though  it  believes  in  Episcopacy  (a  gov- 
ernment by  Bishops),  yet  rejects  the 
doctrine  of  "Apostolic  Succession."  It 
has  two  good  reasons  for  so  doing:  First, 


THE    METHODIST    CHURCH.  181 

the  Bible  does  not  teach  such  a  doctrine; 
Second,  that  Church  has  certainly  no 
such  '' succession  " — cannot  go  beyond 
Mr.  Wesley  for  its  Bishopric,  yet  he  was 
not  a  Bishop ! 

II. — THE    GOVERNMENT    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

The  Methodist  Church  in  this  country 
recognizes  three  classes  of  preachers — 
Deacon^  Elder,  Bishop.  Its  very  name 
shows  that  it  recognizes  Bishops,  for  it  is 
called  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church. 
(We,  of  course,  are  not  speaking  of  the 
minor  branches  that  have  broken  off 
from  the  parent  stem.)  And  according 
to  Webster,  and,  indeed,  according  to 
all  authorities,  the  word  Episcopacy  (from 
which  Episcopal  is  derived)  means  a 
"government  of  the  Church  by  Bishops 
or  prelates."  Besides,  the  Discipline  of 
that  Church  clearly  recognizes  grades  in 
the  ministry.  ^N'ow,  it  will  be  remem- 
bered that  in  a  previous  chapter,  we  at- 


182      THE  METHODIST  CHURCH. 

tempted  to  show  (and  we  think  we  suc- 
ceeded) that  Christ  taught  no  such  doc- 
trine; hence  it  is-not  necessary  to  repeat 
the  argument  here. 

The  doctrine  of  that  Church,  however, 
does  recognize  grades  in  the  ministry, 
and  we  now  propose  to  show  from  their 
own  Discipline,  the  functions  and  powers 
of  these  separately. 

1.  The  office  of  Bishop. — It  is  the  duty 
of  the  Bishop  to  preside  in  the  General 
and  Annual  Conferences;  to  fix  the  ap- 
pointment of  the  preachers  in  the  An- 
nual Conference;  to  choose  the  Presid- 
ing Elders,  fix  their  stations,  and  change 
them  when  he  judges  it  necessary;  to 
change,  receive,  and  suspend  preachers 
in  the  intervals  of  the  Conference,  as 
necessity  may  require,  and  as  the  Discip- 
line directs;  to  ordain  Bishops,  Elders, 
and  Deacons;  to  decide  all  questions  of 
law  coming  before  him  in  the  regular 
business  of  an  Annual  Conference;    to 


THE    METHODIST    CHURCH.  183 

liear  and  decide  appeals  of  the  Quarterly 
Conferences  on  questions  of  law.  wlien 
he  shall  be  presiding  in  any  Annual 
Conference;  to  see  that  the  districts  be 
formed  according  to  his  judgment;  to 
unite  two  or  more  circuits,  stations,  or 
missions  together  for  Quarterly  Confer- 
erence  purposes,  allowing  the  financial 
interests  and  pastoral  duties  of  each  to 
remain  separate  and  independent,  and  to 
divide  a  circuit,  station,  or  mission  into 
two  or  more  when  he  judges  it  neces- 
sary; to  travel  during  the  year,  as  far  as 
practicable,  through  the  Presiding  El- 
ders' districts,  which  may  be  included  in 
his  Episcopal  district,  in  order  to  preach 
and  to  oversee  the  spiritual  and  temporal 
affairs  of  the  Church. 

The  foregoing  is  a  long  sentence,  and 
the  reader,  before  he  got  through  with 
it,  felt,  no  doubt,  not  only  like  stopping 
to  catch  his  breath,  but  to  consider  the 
imrmmse  power  vested  in  one  man  I     Read 


184  THE   METHODIST   CHURCH. 

that  long  sentence  again  (and  every 
word  of  it  is  from  the  Discipline),  and 
see  what  a  Bishop  in  the  Methodist 
Church  may  do — rather  what  he  may 
not  do!  Think  of  it:  he  stations  the 
preachers — tells  each  man  where  he  is 
to  go;  and,  in  so  doing,  there  is  no 
earthly  power  that  can  hinder — all  the 
legal  restraint  in  the  case  is  that  he  shall 
permit  no  man  "to  remain  in  the  same 
circuit  or  station  more  than  four  years 
successively." 

Now  why  should  not  a  congregation 
be  permitted  to  select  its  own  preacher? 
Does  it  not  know  better  than  even  a 
Bishop  whsit  ^ind  of  minister  it  wants? 
And  why,  too,  may  not  a  preacher  stay 
with  his  flock  longer  than  four  years? 
Why  may  not  a  preacher,  like  a  lawyer 
or  physician,  remain  indefinitely  in  a 
community?  What  peculiarity  in  the 
ministerial  profession  precludes  the  idea 
of  a  longer  stay  in  one  place  than  four 


THE    METHODIST    CHURCH.  185 

years?  A  hundred  similar  questions 
could  be  asked,  but  they  are  left  to  the 
reader. 

Again,  it  is  the  Bishop's  prerogative 
to  choose  all  his  Presiding  Elders,  fix 
their  stations,  and  change  them  when  he 
deems  it  necessary;  not  when  the  other 
preachers  or  people,  or  both,  may  judge 
it  necessary,  but  when  he,  the  Bishop,  so 
thinks!  (Please  read  that  long  sentence 
again.) 

Moreover,  he  ordains  the  preachers — 
all  of  them;  and  before  he  does  so, 
umong  other  questions  which  he  pro- 
pounds to  them,  the  two  following 
should  not  be  overlooked.  To  Deacons 
be  asks,  "  Will  you  reverently  obey  tliem 
to  whom  the  charge  and  government 
over  you  is  committed ;  following  with  a 
glad  mind  and  will  their  godly  admoni- 
tions"? The  answer  to  the  same  is,  "I 
will  endeavor  so  to  do,  the  Lord  being 
my  helper."     To  Elders  he  asks,  "  Will 


186      THE  METHODIST  CHURCH. 

you  reverently  obey  your  chief  minis- 
ters unto  whom  is  committed  the  charge 
and  government  over  3^ou;  following 
with  a  glad  mind  and  will  their  godly 
admonitions,  submitting  yourselves  to 
their  godly  judgments"?  The  answer 
is,  "I  will  so  do,  the  Lord  being  my 
helper."  I^ow,  when  we  scrutinize  the 
foregoing  questions,  we  find  that  the 
Deacon  promises  to  "reverently  obey" 
the  Bishop,  and  the  Presiding  Elder ;  and 
the  Elder  promises  to  "reverently  obey  " 
the  Bishop.  The  only  comment  w^e 
offer  in  this  case  is,  What  humility  and 
self-abasement! 

Again,  the  Bishop  decides  all  questions 
of  law  coming  before  him  in  the  Annual 
Conference;  nor  is  there  any  appeal  from 
this  decision  to  an}^  court  except  to  a 
"College  of  Bishops" — not  even  the 
whole  Conference  can  reverse  his  deci- 
sion! He  also  decides  all  appeals  of 
the    Quarterly    Conferences;    and   forms 


THE  METHODIST  CHURCH.      187 

the    districts    ''according    to    his   judg- 
ment." 

A  great  deal  more  might  be  said,  but 
we  forbear;  and,  in  conclusion  upon  this 
point,  we  ask  every  candid  reader  if 
there  is  not  too  much  power  put  into  the 
hands  of  one  man?  Was  Peter,  Paul, 
or  any  other  apostle  ever  clothed  with 
such  authority?     Kever,  no,  never! 

2.  The  Presiding  Elder. — The  next  in 
authority  to  the  Bishop,  in  the  Meth- 
odist Church,  is  the  Presiding  Elder. 
Ilis  duty  is  to  travel  through  his  ap- 
pointed district,  in  order  to  preach  and 
oversee  the  spiritual  and  temporal  affairs 
of  the  Church;  in  the  absence  of  the 
Bishop  to  take  charge  of  all  the  travel- 
ing and  local  preachers,  and  exhorters, 
and  suspend  preachers  in  his  district, 
during  the  absence  of  the  Bishop,  as  the 
Discipline  directs;  to  be  present,  as  far 
as  practicable,  at  all  the  quarterly  meet- 
ings;   to    decide    all    questions    of    law 


188      THE  METHODIST  CHURCH. 

which  may  come  up  in  the  regular  busi- 
ness of  the  Quarterly  Conference,  when 
submitted  to  him  in  writing,  subject  to 
an  appeal  to  the  President  (Bishop)  of 
the  next  Annual  Conference;  to  take 
care  that  every  part  of  the  Discipline  be 
enforced  in  his  district;  to  attend  the 
Bishop  when  present  in  his  district, 
etc.,  etc. 

The  foregoing  is  likewise  a  long  sen- 
tence; but  it  contains  a  synopsis  of  the 
duties  of  Presiding  Elder.  An  extended 
comment  is  not  necessary  in  this  case. 
A  careful  examination  will  show  the 
reader  that  the  Presiding  Elder  possesses 
almost  as  much  power  in  his  district,  as 
the  Bishop  does  in  his;  there  being  this 
difference,  however:  the  Bishop  jcontrols 
the  Presiding  Elder,  while  he,  the  Elder, 
controls  the  preachers,  exhorters,  etc., 
that  are  in  his  territory.  Removing  the 
over-shadowing  presence  and  power  of 
the    Bishop,    therefore,    the     Presiding 


THE   METHODIST    CnURCH.  189 

Elder  possesses  very  great  power — too 
miicli  for  any  one  man  to  exercise. 

3.  The  Deacon. — Besides  Bishops  and 
Presiding  Elders,  there  are  those  who 
are  "in  charge  of  circuits,  stations  or 
missions,  but  as  they  are  ministers  of  the 
same  grade  as  Presiding  Elders,  we  pass 
them  by,  and  devote  only  a  line  or  tw^o 
to  Deacons.  This  is  the  first  order  (the 
lowest  grade)  in  the  ministry;  and  we 
refer  to  it  simply  because  we  have  prom- 
ised to  do  so.  His  duties  are  defined  to 
be  "To  administer  baptism,  and  to  sol- 
emnize the  rite  of  matrimony,  in  the  ab- 
sence of  the  Elder  (cau't  do  so  if  he  is 
present) ;  to  assist  the  Elder  (the  minister 
of  the  second  grade)  in  administering 
the  Lord's  Supper  (can't  do  so  by  him- 
self) ;  and  to  do  all  the  duties  of  a  trav- 
eling preacher." 

"We  cannot  resist  the  impulse  to  offer 
at  least  one  criticism.  There  are  but 
two  sacraments  in  the  Church — baptism 


190  THE    METHODIST    CHURCH. 

and  the  Lord's  Supper — and  if  a  Deact  .> 
can  administer  one,  why  can  he  not  ad- 
minister the  other?  Yet  we  see  from 
the  foregoing  that,  though  he  may  ad- 
minister the  ordinance  of  baptism,  he  is 
not  permitted,  by  the  Discipline,  to  ad- 
minister the  sacrament  of  the  Supper! 
Who  can  tell  us  why? 

A  few  more  words  will  close  all 
we  have  to  say  upon  the  government 
of  the  Methodist  Church.  At  the  time 
the  Cumberland  Presbyterian  Church 
was  organized  (1810),  no  minister  in  the 
Methodist  Church  was  permitted  to 
remain  in  one  charge  or  station  longer 
than  two  years;  nor  was  lay  represen- 
tation tolerated.  Both  of  these  changes 
are  of  recent  date;  the  latter  in  1866, 
and  the  former  in  1870.  But  what 
can  lay  repesentation  amount  to  in  a 
Church  where  the  ministry — especially 
the  Bishops  and  the  Presiding  Elders — 
have  such  power?      Besides,   when   we 


THE  METHODIST  CHURCH.      191 

scrutinize  the  matter,  the  lay  represen- 
tation is  comparatively  nominal;  would 
not,  perhaps,  when  we  take  all  their 
Church  courts  into  consideration,  aver-" 
age  more  than  one  layman  to  three  minis- 
ters, and  a  portion  of  the  lay  delegation 
may  be  local  preachers!  Moreover,  the 
Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  Il^orth — 
the  largest  branch  of  the  Methodists  in 
the  world — still  refuses  to  tolerate  lay 
representation,  in  all  its  courts. 

Summing  the  whole  matter  up,  then, 
we  ask  the  question.  Is  not  the  govern- 
ment of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church 
very  objectionable?  Let  the  reader  an- 
swer the  question,  but  let  him  do  so  with 
the  teachings  of  Christ  and  his  apostles 
in  view. 

III. CHRISTIAN    PERFECTION SANCTIFI- 

CATION. 

The  Methodist  Church  teaches  the  doc- 
trine of  Christian  [)erfection  in  this  life— 


192      THE  METHODIST  CHURCH. 

that  Christians  may  live  without  sin. 
This  theory  is,  we  think,  so  contrary 
to  the  Bible,  that  it  is  not  deemed  neces- 
sary to  devote  much  space  to  a  consid- 
eration of  it. 

The  Scriptures  abound  with  the  most 
explicit  declarations  against  this  doc- 
trine. "For  there  is  not  a  just  man 
upon  earth,  that  doeth  good,  and  sinneth 
not."— Ecc.  vii.  20.  ''Who  can  say,  I 
have  made  my  heart  clean,  that  I  am 
pure  from  my  sin?" — Pro  v.  xx.  9.  "If 
we  say  that  we  have  no  sin,  we  deceive 
ourselves,  and  the  truth  is  not  in  us." 
1  John  i.  8.  Scores  of  just  such  pas- 
sages could  be  quoted;  but  surely  these 
are  sufficient,  especially  when  we  con- 
sider how  positive  they  are. 

If  Christian  perfection  is  attainable  in 
this  life,  is  it  not  a  little  curious  that  not 
one  of  the  characters  spoken  of  in  the 
Bible  ever  reached  that  point?  Read 
the  lives  of  the  patriarchs,  the  prophets, 


THE   METHODIST   CHURCH.  193 

and  the  apostles,  and  not  a  case  can  be 
found  where  a  single  one  of  them  set  up 
such  a  claim  I  Abraham  and  the  other 
patriarchs  sinned.  Moses,  "the  meekest 
man,"  did  likewise.  Even  Job,  who 
had  been  chastened  by  the  scA'erest  af- 
flictions, says:  "If  I  justify  myself, 
mine  own  mouth  shall  condemn  me:  if  I 
say,  I  am  perfect,  it  shall  also  prove  me 
perverse." — Job  ix.  20.  John,  "the  be- 
loved disciple,"  says:  "If  we  say  that 
we  have  not  sinned,  we  make  him  (God) 
a  liar,  and  his  w^ord  is  not  in  us." — 
1  John  i.  10.  And  Paul,  one  of  the 
grandest  specimens  of  Christian  charac- 
ter that  the  world  ever  saw,  instead  of 
claiaiing  such  perfection,  says:  "But  I 
see  another  law  in  my  members,  warring^ 
against  the  law  of  my  mind,  and  bring- 
ing me  into  captivity  to  the  law^  of  sin^ 
which  is  in  my  members." — Rom.  vii. 
23.  Again:  "For  the  flesh  lusteth 
against  the  Spirit,  and  the  Spirit  against 
13 


194      THE  METHODIST  CHURCH. 

the  iiesh;  and  these  are  contrary  the  one 
to  the  other;  so  that  ye  cannot  do  the 
things  that  ye  would." — Gah  v.  17. 

Then,  as  not  even  an  insjpired  person 
dared  to  claim  such  perfection,  how  can 
IDE  hope  to  reach  it?  Is  it  not  a  fact 
(the  question  is  asked  in  all  kindness) 
that,  as  a  general  thing,  those  who  pro- 
fess this  sanctification  are  the  ones  in 
whom  others  have  comparatively  lit.tle 
confidence?  This,  too,  is  a  fair  ques- 
tion ;  for  the  tree  (the  doctrine)  is  to  be 
judged  by  its  fruits. 

IV. CLASS-MEETINGS    AND    SEEKERS. 

When  the  Cumberland  Presbyterian 
Church  was  organized,  the  Methodist 
Church  required  its  members  to  attend 
class-meetings;  and  it  received  into  its 
pale  '-seekers" — persons  who  made  no 
pretensions  to  being  Christians.  INTow 
the  "rule"  is  so  relaxed  that  it  is  not 
made    obligatory    upon   its   members   to 


THE  METHODIST  CHURCH.      195 

attend  class-meetings;  and  receiving 
"seekers"  into  the  Chnrcli  has  been 
abandoned  entirely.  It  was  certainly 
wise  in  the  Church  to  abandon  the  latter 
practice,  for  there  is  no  authority  in  the 
word  of  God  for  it.  And  as  attending 
class-meeting  is  now  left  to  the  discretion 
of  the  members,  this,  we  think,  is 
a  virtual  acknowledgement  that  class- 
meetings  are  of  not  much  authority — we 
mean  Scriptural  authority.  It  is  true 
the  Discipline  says:  "And  let  the  mem- 
bers be  exhorted  to  attend  the  meetings 
of  the  same."  But,  as  has  been  stated, 
the  members  are  not  required  to  attend 
—they  meet  "at  their  own  option." 

V. LOVE-FEASTS. 

According  to  the  Discipline,  "Love- 
feasts  shall  be  held  quarterly,  or  at  such 
other  times  as  the  preacher  in  charge 
may  consider  expedient,  with  closed 
doors,  to  which,  beside  Church  members, 


196      THE  METHODIST  CHURCH. 

other  serious  persons  may  be  admitted.'^ 
It  will  also  be  seen  from  the  same  Dis- 
cipline, that  "every  one  present  then 
partakes  of  a  little  bread  and  water,  in 
token  of  brotherly  love." 

ISTow,  where  is  the  authority  in  the 
Bible  for  such  a  ^' feast''?  Why,  too,  are 
these  "feasts"  held  with  closed  doors? 
Both  questions,  we  think,  would  be 
rather  difficult  to  answer.  It  is  true,  we 
read  of  one  service  in  the  ^ew  Testa- 
ment which  commenced  with  closed  doors* 
but  while  Paul  and  Silas  prayed,  these 
doors,  though  bolted  and  barred,  flew 
open  I  But  where  the  Scriptural  autho- 
rity comes  from  for  a  love-feast  with 
bread  and  water,  we  know  not. 

VI. APOSTASY FALLING  FROM  GRACE. 

The  Methodist  Church  also  teaches  that 
a  Christian  may  lose  his  or  her  religion — 
that  a  truly  regenerated  child  of  God 
may  so  apostatize  as  to  be  finally  lost. 


THE    METHODIST    CHURCH.  197 

This  is  an  important  subject — a  sub- 
ject in  which  all  Christians  especially, 
are  most  deeply  interested.  And  that 
no  sort  of  injustice  may  be  done  to  the 
advocates  of  this  doctrine,  we  give  their 
own  points,  one  by  one — their  strongest 
points,  too.  Before  doing  so,  however, 
the  attention  of  the  reader  is  called  to 
an  explanatory  remark.  Those  who  op- 
pose the  doctrine  of  apostasy  do  not 
deny  that  a  Christian  may  do  wrong — 
may,  through  the  temptations  of  Satan, 
the  world,  and  the  flesh,  incur  God's 
displeasure,  and  may  be  deprived  of  the 
comforts  of  religion — but  they  do  deny 
that  such  will  ever  so  apostatize  as  to  be 
forever  lost.  Kow  for  the  arguments, 
as  we  promised. 

1.  '^  Angels  fell,  and  if  they  fell,  why 
may  not  Christians?" 

We  answer,  Yes,  they  did  fall,  but 
those  ano^els  did  not  live  under  the  die- 
pensation    that    Christians    do.       They 


198  THE    METHODIST    CHURCH. 

were  under  law,  and  one  sin,  in  thought 
or  deed,  decided  their  destiny  forever. 
The  same  is  true  now  of  all  angels.  One 
sin  would  hurl  from  tlie  battlements  of 
heaven  the  brightest  angel  that  vies 
around  the  throne  of  God,  because  each 
one  stands  or  falls  upon  his  own  merits — 
has  no  Saviour,  no  Christ,  no  Surety.  Do 
we  not,  then,  at  once  see  that  the  cases 
are  not  at  all  similar?  The  argument 
(if  indeed  it  is  worthy  the  name)  amounts 
to  nothing. 

2.  Adam  fell,  and  if  he  fell,  why  may 
not  Christians? 

Yes,  Adam  did  fall,  but,  like  the  an- 
gels just  spoken  of,  he  was  to  stand  or 
fall  upon  his  own  merits — was  under  '*a 
covenant  of  works."  It,  therefore,  re- 
quired only  one  sin  to  cause  his  fall,  just 
as  in  the  case  ot  the  angels.  But,  in 
consequence  of  the  "new  and  better 
covenant"  (the  covenant  of  redemp- 
tion), Christians  stand  upon  a  foundation 


THE  METHODIST  CHUKCH.       199 

very  different  from  that  upon  which  the 
angels  stood,  and  from  tliat  upon  which 
Adam  in  his  primitive  state  stood,  for 
Christ  is  their  (the  Christians')  surety; 
in  him,  not  in  themselves,  they  stand  or 
falL  We,  therefore,  see  at  a  gkmce  that 
there  is  no  anahogy  whatever  between 
the  "standing"  of  Adam  ii!  his  original 
state  and  tliat  of  Christians  under  tlie 
new  covenant,  of  which  \yq  have  just 
spoken.  This  argument,  then,  like  the 
other,  amounts  to  nothing.  The  truth 
is,  if  it  be  an  argument,  it  proves  too 
much  for  the  advocates  of  apostasy;  for 
it  shows  that  only  one  sin,  and  the  very 
least  sin,  too,  that  the  mind  can  possibly 
conceive  of,  w^ould  cause  apostasy- 
would  wn-regenerate  the  soul;  whereas, 
the  advocates  of  this  doctrine  will  not 
agree  that  one,  or  even  a  hundred  such 
sins  would  produce  such  a  dreadful  ca- 
lamity. 

3.  Bible  cases  of  apostasy. 


200  THE    METHODIST    CHURCH. 

The  champions  of  this  doctrine  tell  us 
that  it  must  be  true,  because  there  are 
many  cases  of  apostasy  mentioned  in 
the  Bible.  Let  us  examine  the  cases  to 
which  they  refer,  one  by  one. 

(a)  The  case  of  Saul. 

Saul  was  a  very  wicked  man-  -behaved 
himself  in  a  most  ungodly  mai^ner — but 
we  are  not  particularly  astonished  at  his 
conduct,  for  we  have  no  proof  whatever 
that  he  was  ever  a  child  of  God — a 
Christian.  "But,"  say  the  adtocatesof 
apostasy,  "  Saul  must  have  been  a  re- 
generated man,  for  God  gave  hira  'an- 
other heart,'  and  he  'prophesied.'"  It 
is  admitted  that  God  did  give  him  "an- 
other heart;"  he,  however,  gave  Nebu- 
chadnezzar "  another  heart,"  but  it  was 
the  heart  of  a  beast.  Remember,  the 
Bible  does  not  say  that  God  gave  Saul 
a  '^neio  heart'' — the  heart  of  a  regen- 
erated man — but  "another  heart."  And 
while  we  admit  that   the   Spirit  of  tne 


THE    METHODIST   CHURCH.  201 

Lord  came  npoii  him,  so  that  he  did 
^^  prophesy,"  yet  we  must  also  remember 
that  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  came  upon 
Balaam,  and  he  prophesied,  even  con- 
cerning Christ,  but  who  will  dare  say 
that  he  (Balaam)  was  ever  a  Christian? 
The  Bible  also  tells  us  that  Caiaphas, 
the  high  priest,  prophesied,  but  no  man 
will  say  that  he  was  a  good  man. 

We  must,  therefore,  be  excused  for 
demanding  better  evidence  than  "an- 
other heart"  and  the  power  to  "proph- 
esy," before  we  can  admit  that  Saul  was 
ever  a  Christian. 

(6)  The  case  of  David. 

It  is  true  that  David  did  very  wrong — 
even  caused  a  man  to  be  murdered — but 
.how  deeply  did  he  repent  of  his  wicked- 
ness, and  how  fervently  did  he  pray  God 
to  "deliver  him  from  blood  guiltiness!" 
But  he  never  "fell  from  grace" — simply 
lost,  for  a  short  time,  the  "jo^/s  of  salva- 
tion," as  he  confessed,  but  he  never  did 


202      THE  METHODIST  CHURCH. 

lose  the  salvation  itself,  for  every  one 
admits  that  he  was  saved. 

(c)  The  case  of  Solomon. 

No  one  will  deny  that  Solomon  waSy 
at  one  period  of  his  life,  a  very  dissolutey 
licentious  man,  but  that  he  was  finally 
lost  no  one  can  prove.  The  fact  is,  the 
evidence  is  all  on  the  other  side;  for,  in 
the  latter  part  of  his  life,  he  confessed 
that  such  a  course  as  he  had  at  one  time 
pursued,  was  all  "vanity  and  vexation 
of  spirit;"  also,  "the  conclusion  of  the 
whole  matter"  with  him  was,  "fear  God, 
keep  his  commandments,  and  live."  He 
must  have  been  a  Christian,  else  God 
would  not  have  permitted  him  to  write 
three  books  of  the  Bible;  and  one  of 
these — the  book  of  Ecclesiastes — shows- 
most  conclusively  that  he  not  only  had 
the  "root  of  the  matter  in  him,"  but 
that,  like  a  genuine  Christian,  he  was 
willing  to  confess  his  sins  and  repent  of 
them.     Hence,   we  see  nothing  in   tliia 


THE  METHODIST  CHURCH.      203 

case  to  prove  the  doctrine  of  final  apos- 
tasy, as  taught  by  our  Methodist  friends. 

{d)  The  case  of  Judas. 

With  the  advocates  of  this  doctrine, 
the  case  of  Judas  is  a  strong  one — the 
strongest  of  all.  That  Judas  was  lost — 
died  and  went  to  hell — no  one,  perhaps, 
will  deny;  but  that  he  ever  was  a  Chris- 
tian, no  one  can  prove.  Our  Methodist 
brethren  tell  us  he  was  one  of  the  twelve, 
and  they  ask  triumphantly,  v'Why  did 
Christ  choose  him  as  one  of  the  apostles, 
if  he  was  not  a  good  man?"  Why  he 
was  chosen,  is  not  the  question.  The 
question  is,  was  he  a  good  man — a  Chris- 
tian ?  Let  the  Bible  answer,  for  that  is 
the  only  evidence  that  is  worth  a  farthing 
in  this  case.  The  Saviour  says:  "Have 
I  not  chosen  you  twelve,  and  one  of  you 
is  a  devil?" — John  vi.  70.  This  lan- 
guage, be  it  remembered,  was  spoken 
before  Satan  entered  into  Judas  to  betray 
Christ.     John  says  "he  was  a  thief,"  and 


204  THE    METHODIST    CUUKCH. 

this,  too,  was  said  'prior  to  the  time  that 
he  betrayed  the  SavioTir.  Again,  the 
Saviour  says:  -'There  are  some  of  you 
that  believe  not.  For  Jesus  knew  from 
the  beginning  who  they  were  that  be- 
lieved not,  and  who  should  betray  him." 
— John  vi.  64.  What  else  can  this  verse 
mean  than  that  from  the  very  commence- 
ment of  the  ministry  of  Judas  he  was  a 
non-believer,  and  would  be  ready,  as 
soon  as  opportunity  offered,  to  betray 
his  Master?  If,  then,  the  foregoing 
scriptures  do  not  prove  that  Judas  never 
was  a  Christian,  then  language  has  no 
meaning.  ISTow,  why  he  was  chosen  by 
Christ  one  of  the  twelve  apostles,  we 
cannot  tell ;  but,  as  remarked  before, 
that  is  not  the  question  under  considera- 
tion. The  point  we  are  trying  to  settle 
is,  was  he  a  Christian?  And,  surely,  to 
the  unbiased  mind,  the  scriptures  we 
have  quoted  do  settle  that  point  forever. 
The  truth  is.  he  did  not  have  the  first 


THE   METHODIST    CHURCH.  205 

element  of  a  Christian — was  a  '' thief '^ 
and  a  ^' devil,''  and  "cared  not  for  the 
poor."  Away,  then,  with  the  idea  that 
he  fell  from  grace;  he  never  had  any 
grace ! 

(e)  The  case  of  Petf^r. 

We  admit  that  Peter  was  a  Christian — 
had  been  regenerated  or  "born  again" — 
and  if  the  advocates  of  apostasy  can 
prove  that  Peter  fell  from  grace,  we  will 
yield  the  point. 

Let  us  briefly  look  at  the  facts  in  the 
case.  Peter  was  a  bold  man  and  had  a 
great  deal  of  confidence  in  himself.  As 
evidence  of  this,  when  the  blessed  Sav- 
iour said,  "All  ye  shall  be  offended  be- 
cause of  me  this  night,"  Peter  promptly 
replied,  "Though  all  men  shall  be  of- 
fended because  of  thee,  yet  will  I  never 
be  offended."— Matt.  xxvi.  31,  33,  When, 
however,  the  trial  came,  Peter's  courage 
failed,  and  he  not  only  denied  his  Mas- 
ter, but  he  cursed  and  swore.     But  did 


206  THE    METHODIST    CHURCH. 

he  fall  from  grace?  did  his  faith  fail, 
and  did  he  have  to  be  re- regenerated? 
We  say,  Xo,  most  emphatically;  and  we 
so  answer  for  two  reasons  : 

First.  The  Saviour,  after  having  warned 
Peter  that  "  Satan  desired  to  have  him 
that  he  might  sift  him  as  wheat,"  said, 
''But  I  have  prayed  for  thee,  that  thy 
faith  fail  not."  Was  the  prayer  of  the 
Saviour  answered?  Most  assuredly-  it 
was,  for  lie  said  the  Father  always  heard 
him.— John  xi.  42.  If,  then,  the  prayer 
of  Christ  was  answered,  Peter's  faith 
never  failed  him,  for  the  burden  of  that 
prayer  was,  that  it  (Peter's  faith)  should 
not  fail. 

Second.  The  language  use<l  by  the 
Saviour  himself  in  reference  to  Peter's 
case,  shows  most  conclusively  that  he 
(Peter)  ha.d  not  lost  his  religion.  Said  he : 
"When  thou  art  converted,  strengthen 
thy  brethren." — Luke  xxii.  32.  Kow, 
the    Greek    word    which    is   translated 


THE  METHODIST  CHURCH.      207 

*' coil  verted,"  as  every  scholar  knows, 
means  "  to  turn,"  "  to  turn  about."  John 
xxi.  20:  "Then  Peter,  turning  about, 
seeth  the  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved," 
etc.  The  word  translated  in  the  last 
verse  "turning  about,"  is  precisely  the 
word  which  the  Saviour  used  when,  in 
addressing  Peter,  he  said,  "  art  converted.'' 
Therefore,  all  that  Peter  had  to  do  was 
to  "turn  about;"  not  a  word  is  said 
about  being  regenerated  again.  The 
word  which  signifies  to  be  "born  again," 
as  used  by  Christ  in  conversation  with 
]!:^icodemus,  is  a  very  different  word  from 
the  one  employed  by  the  Saviour  in  ad- 
dressing Peter.  Though  Peter  had  done 
wrong,  very  w^rong,  yet  he  did  not  need 
to  be  "born  again,"  the  Saviour  himself 
being  the  judge.  Then  have  we  not 
proven  most  conclusively  that  Peter 
never  fell  from  grace  ? 

We  cannot,  however,  dismiss  this  case 
without  remarking  that  this  transaction 


208      THE  METHODISJ  CHURCH. 

was  a  very  important  one  to  Peter- 
taught  him  and  all  other  Christians  a 
great  lesson.  He  imagined  that  he  was 
strong  enough  to  stand  alone;  forgot 
that  his  strength  was  in  Christ,  and  not 
himself.  How  nobly,  too,  he  confessed 
his  error,  in  the  first  epistle  he  ever 
wrote?  Hear  him:  "Blessed  be  the 
God  and  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  which  according  to  his  abundant 
mercy  hath  begotten  us  again  unto  a 
lively  hope  by  the  resurrection  of  Jesus 
Christ  from  the  dead,  to  an  inheritance 
incorruptible,  and  undefiled,  and  that 
fadeth  not  away,  reserved  in  heaven  for 
you,  who  are  kept  by  the  power  of 
God  through  faith  unto  salvation  read}^ 
to  be  revealed  in  the  last  time." — 
1  Pet.  i.  3-5. 

4.  The  frequent  warnings  and  threat- 
enings  of  the  Scriptures. 

The  advocates  of  apostasy  tell  us  that 
the    doctrine    must  be  true,    else  there 


THE   METHODIST    CHUECH.  20\^ 

would  not  be  so  many  warnings  in  the 
Bible  on  this  subject. 

'No  one  acquainted  with  the  Scriptures 
will  deny  that  they  do  contain  warnings 
and  admonitions  in  regard  to  Christian 
fidelity,  but  the  question  is.  are  these 
warnings  and  admonitions  intended  to 
teach  that  a  Christian  mav  lose  his  relicr- 
ion  and  be  lost?     We  think  not. 

There  are  in  the  Church  (we  use  the 
word  Church  in  its  broadest  sense)  three 
classes  of  adult  members,  viz. :  the  true 
Christian,  the  self- deceived,  and  the 
hypocrite.  Xo  one,  it  is  believed,  will 
call  in  question  this  statement.  Unless- 
the  Bible,  therefore,  should  contain  mat- 
ter adapted  to  the  wants  and  necessities 
of  these  three  classes — matter  calculated 
to  bring  out  the  best  possible  results- 
from  such  material — it  would  fail  to  ba 
the  book  the  Church  needs.  It  must 
have  encouragements,  admonitions,  and 
threatenings,  else  the  Christian  could- 
14 


210  THE    METHODIST    CHURCH. 

not  be  developed,  the  self-deceived  could 
not  be  awakened,  nor  could  tbe  hypocrite 
be  aroused.  These  admonitions  and 
warnings,  too,  must  of  necessity  be 
general.  For  instance,  it  Vv^ould  not  be 
for  the  best  for  it  to  be  said  in  these 
promises,  warnings,  etc.,  that  this  is  for 
the  true  Christian,  this  for  the  self- 
deceived,  and  this  for  the  hypocrite,  be- 
cause the  very  ones,  (the  self-deceived 
and  the  hypocrite)  who  most  need 
these  warnings  and  threateningB  would, 
under  the  protection  of  a  Christian  pro- 
fession, say,  we  do  not  belong  to  either 
class;  whereas,  by  making  these  warn- 
ings, etc.,  general  and  not  specific,  those 
who  need  them  may  be  greatly  profited 
by  them. 

To  illustrate  still  further :  In  our  Com- 
monwealth, we  have  citizens  of  differ- 
ent kinds  (just  as  in  the  Church  we  have 
members  of  different  classes),  but  the 
enactments  of  our  civil  code  are  general — 


THE  METHODIST  CHURCH.      211 

must  be  so.  The  laws,  with  their  "  warn- 
ings and  threateniijgs,"  are  addressed  to 
all  citizens.  Thej,  for  instance,  tell  the 
penalties  for  theft,  for  house-burning, 
etc.,  and  all  citizens  are  "warned"  by 
these  penalties.  They  say  to  the  honest 
man,  If  you  steal,  you  shall  be  pun- 
ished, and  to  the  upright  citizen,  If  you 
burn  your  neighbor's  house,  you  shall  be 
put  into  the  penitentiary.  In  all  such 
cases,  however,  the  answer  would  be, 
"  We  know  that  these  things  are  so,  but, 
then,  we  have  not  the  most  remote  idea 
of  committing  either  crime — have  no 
idea  of  stealing  another  man's  goods, 
uor  of  burning  his  house."  ^ov  do  such 
laws  with  their  penalties,  though  they 
are  made  general,  even  imply  that  honest 
and  upright  citizens  are  in  the  least  pos- 
sible danger.  They  are  enacted  for  the 
benefit  of  had  men;  of  men  who,  though 
they  mix  and  mingle  with  the  good, 
being     citizens     of     the     same      Com- 


212      THE  METHODIST  CHURCH. 

mon wealth,  yet  do  Dot  belong  to  that 
class. 

Just  so,  precisely,  is  it  with  the  warD- 
ings  and  threatenings  of  the  Scriptures. 
They,  it  is  true,  tell  what  would  be  the 
result  if  Christians  were  to  do  thus  and 
80 ;  but,  then,  the  genuine  child  of  God 
says:  "Those  penalties  do  not  in  the 
least  disturb  me,  for  I  have  no  inten- 
tion whatever  of  placing  myself  in  such 
an  attitude;  these  warnings  and  threat- 
enings, though  general,  cannot  reach  me, 
for  they,  like  the  penalties  of  the  civil 
law,  are  intended  to  reach  the  vicious^ 
not  the  virtuous." 

By  keeping  the  foregoing  suggestions 
in  view,  the  reader  will  not  only  see  that 
the  "warnings  and  threatenings"  fail, 
utterly  fail,  to  establish  the  doctrine  of 
apostasy;  but  he  will  have  in  his  pos- 
session a  key  which  will  enable  him  to 
understand  thoroughly  all  that  class  of 
Scripture  texts  to  which  the  advocates  of 


THE  METHODIST  CHURCH.      213 

apostasy  have  reference.  For  illustra- 
tion: Paul  says,  '^But  though  we,  or  an 
angel  from  heaven,  preach  any  other  gos- 
pel unto  you  than  that  which  we  have 
preached  unto  you,  let  him  be  accursed." 
— Gal.  i.  8.  The  assertion  of  Paul  is 
certainly  true,  but  did  he,  "  or  an  angel 
from  heaven,"  have  any  intention  of 
doing  so?  1^0,  never.  Again:  "If  any 
man  draw  back,  my  soul  shall  have  no 
pleasure  in  him." — Heb.  x.  38.  This  is 
likewise  true;  but  mark,  Paul  does  not 
say  nor  intimate  that  a  Christian  can 
"draw  back."  Likewise,  the  same  apos- 
tle says:  "If  Christ  be  not  risen,  then  is 
our  preaching  vain,  and  your  faith  is 
also  vain." — 1  Cor.  xv.  14.  But  did  Paul 
intend  to  express  a  single  doubt  that 
Christ  had  risen?     I^ot  so. 

Such  passages  could  be  multiplied  in- 
definitely, but,  with  the  explanations 
which  have  preceded,  these  are  sufficient 
to  convince  us  that  the  "  warnings  and 


214      THE  METHODIST  JHURCH. 

threateuings "  of  tlie  Bible  contaiu  no 
evidence  that  the  doctrine  of  apostasy  as 
taught  by  our  Methodist  frieuds  is  true. 

5.  The  doctrine  of  apostasy  must  be 
true,  else  man  would  not  be  a  free  agent. 

The  meaning  of  this  language,  when 
we  analyze  it,  is  simply  this:  A  Chris- 
tian is  not  a  free  agent  unless  he  can,  at 
pleasure,  sever  his  connection  with 
Christ — can  commit  sin  enough  to  damn 
his  own  soul ! 

Let  us  examine  this  position  and  see 
if  it  is  true.  Upon  what  terms  are 
Christians  made?  In  other  words,  how 
do  sinners  become  Christians?  The  an- 
swer is.  By  faith  in  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ.  There  are,  then,  two  parties  to 
this  transaction,  Christ  and  the  sinner. 
To  become  a  Christian,  therefore,  the 
einner  must  accept  Christ  as  his  Saviour, 
and  he  must  accept  him,  too,  on  the 
very  condition  which  he  (Christ)  pre- 
scribes.      That     condition    is   faith^    as 


THE    METHODIST   CHURCH.  215 

we    have    already    said.       The     sinner's 
agency,    therefore,    is   consulted   in    this 
transaction;    he    has    to    accept    Christ. 
Now,  for  how  long  a  time  does  the  sinner 
accept  him?     Is  it  for  a  limited  or  an 
unlimited  time?     If  he  accepts  him  for  a 
limited  time,  then  his  agency  would  he 
destroyed  should  he  be  forever  confirmed 
in  a  state  of  grace — he  would   not  only 
have   more   than   he  asked   for,    but   he 
would  cease  to  be  a  free   moral   agent. 
If,  however,  he  accepts  him  for  an  un- 
limited time,  for  time  and  eternity,  then 
not  to   forever   confi.rm    him   and   make 
him  sure  of  heaven,  would  be  less  than 
he  asked  for.     !^ow,  what  does  the  sin- 
ner want  when  he  goes  to  Christ?     There 
is  but  one  answer:    It  is  salvation,  eter- 
nal life,  heaven.     He   asks  for  nothing 
less,  desires  nothing  less.     And  as  Christ 
has  nothing  else,  in  this  respect,  to  give 
but  eternal  life,  then  the  sinner   either 
gets  that  or  he  gets  nothing.     If.   then, 


216      THE  METHODIST  CHURCH. 

the  sinner  gets  simply  what  he  asks  for — 
no  more,  no  less — is  his  agency  destroyed 
when  he  gets  it?  How  can  it  be  de- 
stroyed when  he  is  not  only  a  party,  but 
a  willing  party,  to  the  transaction? 
Would  he  not,  too,  rather  make  a  con- 
tract which  would  stand  forever,  inas- 
much as  he  is  the  gainer  by  such  a  con- 
tract? Would  he  not  prefer  to  be  eter- 
nally  happy,  than  to  be  happy  for  a  few 
days?  Would  he  not,  also,  be  very  un 
wise  not  to  make  that  contract  for  eter- 
nity^ if  he  could  do  it,  rather  than  for 
the  'present'^  How  on  earth,  then,  is  a 
man's  agency  destroyed  when  he  has 
secured  to  him  simply  what  he  asked 
for?  What  motive  could  prompt  him  to 
have  it  otherwise?  Instead,  therefore, 
of  having  his  agency  destroyed  by  being 
confirmed  in  a  state  of  security,  the  very 
reverse  is  true  with  the  child  of  God. 
He  wants  eternal  life,  and  nothing  else 
will  satisfy  him.     Besides,  if  a  state  of 


THE  METHODIST  CHURCH.      217 

confirmation  or  security,  while  we  are 
on  earth,  destroys  our  agency,  would  not 
the  same  be  true  vrith  the  blood-washed 
throng  in  heaven?  If,  in  other  words, 
the  Christian  while  here,  must  have 
power  to  fall  from  grace  in  order  to  make 
him  a  free  moral  agent,  n^ust  he  not 
have  the  same  power  after  he  gets  into 
the  city  and  paradise  of  God?  Most 
assuredly  he  must.  Then,  there  is  no 
security  even  in  heaven!  What  a 
•doctrine! 

6.  Actual  cases  of  apostasy  among  us. 

As  proof  that  the  doctrine  of  apostasy 
is  true,  we  are  told  that  there  are  now 
among  us  a  great  many  who  have  ac- 
tually fallen  from  grace.  That  there  are 
many  in  all  our  Churches  who  were  once 
professors  of  religion,  and  who  now  have 
gone  back  to  the  world,  no  one  will 
doubt;  but,  unless  it  can  be  proven  that 
they  were  regenerated — born  again — the 
existence  of  such  cases  proves  nothing  for 


il8      THE  METHODIST  CHURCH. 

the  advocates  of  the  doctrine  of  apostas}" 
Our  only  standard  on  this  subject  i^ 
the  Bible,  not  the  doctrines  and  profes- 
sions of  men.  That  book,  we  thinks 
forever  settles  the  question;  for,  in 
speaking  of  just  such  cases,  it  says: 
"  They  went  out  from  us,  but  they  were- 
not  of  us:  for  if  they  had  been  of  us^ 
they  would  no  doubt  have  continued 
with  us:  but  they  went  out,  that  they 
might  be  made  manifest  that  they  were- 
not  all  of  us." — 1  John  ii.  19.  Again,. 
says  the  Saviour:  "If  a  man  love  me, 
he  will  keep  my  words :  and  my  Father 
will  love  him,  and  we  will  come  unto 
him,  and  make  our  abode  with  him." — 
John  xiv.  23.  It  is  also  said:  "He  that 
saith,  I  know  him,  and  keepeth  not  his- 
commandments,  is  a  liar,  and  the  truth 
is  not  in  him." — 1  John  ii.  4. 

Many  more  such  passages  could  be 
given,  but  ten  thousand  more  could  not 
add  anything  to  the  plain,  positive  declar- 


THE  METHODIST  CHURCH.      219 

ations  tliat  have  been  quoted — passages, 
too,,  which  seem  to  have  been  written 
for  the  purpose  of  teaching  that  those 
who  say  that  they  were  once  regenerated 
and  have  lost  their  religion,  are  simply 
mistaken — are  spurious  cases. 

In  accordance  with  the  promise  made, 
we  have  taken  up,  one  by  one,  the  argu- 
ments relied  upon  by  our  Methodist 
friends  to  prove  the  doctrine  of  apostasy, 
and  we  have  seen  that  they  fail,  utterly 
fail,  to  establish  the  fact  that  a  truly  re- 
generated man  or  woman  can  lose  his  or 
her  religion  and  be  lost.  But,  "to  make 
assurance  doubly  sure,"  it  is  now  pro- 
posed to  consider  briefly  the  arguments 
in  favor  of  the  doctrine  to  the  contrary. 

THE  OTHER  SIDE — THE  FINAL  PERSEVERANCE 
OF   THE   SAINTS. 

Instead  of  admitting  the  probability 
or  the  possibility  of  the  theory  of  apos- 
tasy, we  take  the  position  that  the  truly 


220  THE    METHODIST    CHURCH. 

regenerated  soul  will  certainly  -'perse- 
vere" to  the  end,  and  will  be  eternally 
saved.  In  support  of  this  position,  the 
following  reasons  are  assigned  : 

1.  From  the  nature  of  the  covenant 
which  God  the  Father  made  with  Christ 
the  Sou. 

In  this  covenant  the  promise  was 
made  by  the  Father  to  the  Son  that,  if 
the  latter  would  become  a  propitiation 
and  an  intercessor  for  sinners,  he  should 
have,  as  a  reward  for  his  labors,  a  king- 
dom which  should  never  end.  As  proof 
of  this,  read  the  following:  "When 
thou  shalt  make  his  soul  an  offering  for 
sin,  he  shall  see  his  seed,  he  shall  prolong 
his  days,  and  the  pleasure  of  the  Lord 
shall  prosper  in  his  hands.  He  shall  see 
of  the  travail  of  his  soul,  and  shall  be  sat- 
isfied :  by  his  knowledge  shall  my  right- 
eous servant  justify  many;  for  he  shall 
bear  their  iniquities.  Therefore  will  I 
divide  him  a  portion  with  the  great,  and 


THE  METHODIST  CHURCH.      221 

he  shall  divide  the  spoil  with  the  strong; 
because  he  hath  poured  out  his  soul  unto 
death:  and  he  was  numbered  with  the 
transgressors;  and  he  bare  the  sin  of 
many,  and  made  intercession  for  the 
transgressors." — Isa.  liii.  10-12.  In  ac- 
cordance with  the  same  sentiment,  the 
Father  says:  "Yet  have  I  set  my  King 
upon  my  holy  hill  of  Zion." — Psa.  ii.  6. 
Furthermore,  the  Father  says  to  the  Son, 
"  Thy  throne,  0  God,  is  for  ever  and  ever; 
the  sceptre  of  thy  kingdom  is  a  right 
sceptre." — Psa.  xlv.  6. 

The  foregoing  passages  (and  many  of 
the  same  kind  could  be  added)  prove 
four  things :  First,  that  a  covenant  was 
made  between  the  Father  and  the  Son; 
second,  that  the  Son  was  to  make  "his 
Boul  an  offering  for  sin  " — was  to  become 
the  Saviour  of  sinners;  third,  that,  for 
the  work  which  he  (the  Son)  performed, 
he  was  to  have  a  kingdom;  fourth,  that 
this   kingdom    should    have    "no    end." 


222      THE  METHODIST  CHURCH. 

Of  the  exact  date  of  this  covenant,  we 
know  not  because  God  has  not  revealed 
it  to  us.  It  was  certainly  in  time  to  save 
Adam,  else  the  promise  could  not  have 
been  made  immediately  after  the  fall, 
that  "the  seed  of  the  woman  shall  bruise 
the  serpent's  head." 

The  foreknowledge  of  the  Father  (not 
his  fore-ordination)  enabled  him  to  make 
the  promise  of  a  kingdom  to  his  Son 
for  he  knew  that  many  of  the  human 
race  would,  of  their  own  voluntary  free 
will,  accept  Christ  as  their  Saviour; 
would,  without  any  decree  on  his  part, 
become  the  subjects  of  Christ,  and,  con- 
sequently, members  of  his  kingdom — 
the  Church.  He  also  reveals  the  man- 
ner in  which  he  would  forever  keep  them 
as  members  of  that  kingdom.  "And  I 
will  make  an  everlasting  covenant  with 
them,  that  I  will  not  turn  away  from 
them,  to  do  them  good;  but  I  will 
put     my     fear     in     their     hearts,    that 


THE  METHODIST  CHURCH.      223 

they  shall  not  depart  from  me." — Jer. 
xxxii.  40. 

This  kingdom,  too,  as  we  have  seen, 
was  not  only  to  be  established,  but  it 
was  to  have  "no  end,"  for  the  Father, 
in  speaking  of  its  durability,  says :  '•  Once 
have  I  sworn  by  my  holiness  that  I  will 
not  lie  unto  David.  His  seed  shall  en- 
dure for  ever,  and' his  throne  as  the  sun 
before  me." — Psa.  Ixxxix.  35,  36.  Again, 
he  says ;  "  His  seed  will  I  make  to  endure 
forever,  and  his  throne  as  the  days  of 
heaven." 

In  the  passages  just  quoted,  we  have 
two  positive  promises  of  the  Father — 
promises,  too,  confirmed  by  an  oath  of 
the  great  Jehovah.  First,  David's  throne 
was  to  be  as  the  days  of  Heaven — endure 
as  long  as  God  himself  lived;  second, 
his  seed  or  subjects  were  to  ''endure  for- 
ever." ITow,  by  turning  to  the  gospel 
by  Luke,  we  find  that  the  throne  of 
David  is  the  throne  which  Christ  pes- 


224      THE  METHODIST  CHURCH. 

Besses.  The  augel  Gabriel,  in  speaking 
of  the  child  that  was  to  be  born,  said: 
"He  shall  be  great,  and  shall  be  called 
the  Son  of  the  Highest;  and  the  Lord 
God  shall  give  unto  him  the  throne  of 
his  father  David:  and  he  shall  reign 
over  the  house  of  Jacob  for  ever;  and  of 
his  kingdom  there  shall  be  no  end." 

This  throne  or  kingdom,  of  courses- 
means  the  Church — could  not  possibly 
mean  anything  else.  And,  in  perfect 
agreement  with  this  idea,  Christ,  in 
speaking  of  his  Church,  says:  "The 
gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against 
it."— Matt.  xvi.  18. 

If  the  foregoing  be  true  (and  we  know 
it  is),  do  we  not  see  that  there  is  no  sort 
of  doubt  in  regard  to  the  present  and 
eternal  salvation  of  every  person  that 
has  been,  is  now,  or  will  be  "born"  into 
that  kingdom  ?  If  this  certainty  did  not 
exist,  then  the  promises  made  in  regard 
to  the  perpetuity  of  that  kingdom,  could 


THE  METHODIST  CHURCH.      225 

Tiot  have  been  made;  for  if  one  Christian 
may  fall  from  grace,  all  may;  and  if  all 
may,  then  God  himself  could  not  have 
said  that  the  "kingdom"  and  the  "seed" 
shall  "  endure  forever,"  and  "  as  the  days 
of  heaven." 

2.  From  the  legal  relation  which  the 
Christian  sustains  to  the  Divine  govern- 
ment. 

The  only  possible  way  for  a  sinner  to 
be  justified  is  by  a  perfect  obedience  to 
the  law  of  God.  This  perfect  obedience, 
however,  cannot  be  rendered  by  him 
because  he  is  a  fallen  creature.  If,  then, 
he  is  ever  justified,  it  must  be  by  another 
who  could  render  that  perfect  obedience 
for  him  which  the  law  imperatively  de- 
mands. The  only  being  in  the  universe 
that  could  do  that  is  Jesus  Christ;  and 
that  he  has  rendered  that  obedience,  is 
evident  from  the  Scriptures.  "For  as 
by  one  man's  disobedience  many  were 
made  sinners,  so  by  the  obedience  of  one 
15 


226  THE    METHODIST    CHURCH. 

shall  many  be  made  righteous." — liom. 
V.  19.  Again :  "  For  Christ  also  hath 
once  sufl'ered  for  sins,  the  just  for  the 
unjust,  that  he  might  bring  us  to  God, 
being  put  to  death  in  the  flesh,  but  quick- 
ened by  the  Spirit." — 1  Pet.  iii.  18.  Also : 
"For  he  hath  made  him  to  be  sin  for  us, 
who  knew  no  sin;  that  we  might  be 
made  the  righteousness  of  God  in  him." 
—2  Cor.  V.  21. 

From  the  foregoing  passages  (and 
many  more  of  the  same  kind  could  be 
furnished),  we  see  that  Christ  has,  by  the 
atonement  which  he  made,  "wrought 
out"  or  purchased  a  righteousness  which 
may  be  made  available  by  the  sinner. 
The  condition,  too,  upon  which  that 
righteousness  can  become  the  righteous- 
ness of  the  sinner,  is  likewise  plainly 
stated  in  the  Scriptures.  "Therefore  we 
conclude  that  a  man  is  justified  by  faith 
without  the  deeds  of  the  law." — Rom.  iii. 
28.     Also :  "  Therefore  being  justified  by 


THE   METHODIST    CHURCH.  227 

faith,  we  have  peace  with  God  through 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ." — Rom.  v.  1. 

The  rigteousness  of  Christ,  then,  is 
the  ground  on  which  the  sinner  is  par- 
doned, and  that  righteousness  becomes 
the  sinner's  righteousness  whenever  he 
exercises  faith  in  Christ.  ''For  Christ 
is  the  end  of  the  law  for  righteousness 
to  every  one  that  believeth." — Rom.  x.  4. 
The  very  moment,  therefore,  that  the 
sinner  exercises  faith  in  the  Son  of  God 
as  his  Saviour,  then  it  is  that  the  right- 
eousness of  Christ  becomes  his — is  im- 
puted to  him.  "And  he  (Abraham)  re- 
ceived the  sign  of  circumcision,  a  seal 
of  the  righteousness  of  the  faith  which 
he  had,  yet  being  uncircumcised:  that 
he  might  be  the  father  of  all  them  that 
believe,  though  they  be  not  circumcised; 
that  righteousness  might  be  imputed 
unto  them  also." — Rom.  iv.  11.  Again  : 
"IN'ow  it  was  not  written  for  his  sake 
alone,  that  it  was  imputed  to  him;  but 


228  THE   METHODIST    CHURCH. 

for  US  also,  to  whom  it  shall  be  imputed, 
if  we  believe  on  him  that  raised  up  Jesus 
our  Lord  from  the  dead;  who  was  de- 
livered for  our  offenses,  and  was  raised 
again  for  our  justification." — Rom.  iv, 
23-25. 

It  is  also  proper  to  state  in  this  con- 
nection, that,  if  the  first  Adam  had  stood 
the  test — had  met  Satan  and  resisted 
him — then  he  and  his  descendants  would 
have  been  confirmed  in  a  state  of  holi- 
ness— would  have  had  everlasting  life 
secured  to  them  in  view  of  Adam'& 
fidelity.  Now,  Christ,  the  second  Adam^ 
did  stand  the  test,  and  stood  it  most 
successfully,  too,  for  he  overcame  the 
combined  powers  of  earth  and  hell. 
Single-handed  he  met  the  tempter  in  the 
wilderness,  the  agonies  in  the  garden, 
and  the  sufferings  on  the  cross ;  yea,  met 
Satan,  met  sin,  met  death,  met  the  grave^ 
and  came  off  conqueror.  Then  why 
may  not  his  children — those  who  have 


THE  METHODIST  CHURCH.      229 

beeu  "born  again" — be  confirmed  in  a 
state  of  everlasting  life  because  of  his 
fidelity  ?  'No  man  living  can  give  a  good 
reason  why  it  should  not  be  so.  On  the 
contrary,  we  have  every  reason  to  be- 
lieve that  such  is  the  case.  In  tbe  eyes 
of  the  law,  he  has  placed  his  believing 
children  precisely  where  the  first  Adam 
would  have  placed  his,  if  he  had  stood 
the  test.  This  idea,  too,  agrees  perfectly 
with  the  teachings  of  the  Apostle  Paul, 
who,  when  speaking  of  himself  and 
other  Christians,  asks,  "Do  we  then 
make  void  the  law  through,  faith?  God 
forbid :  yea,  we  establish  the  law." — Eom. 
iii.  31.  "What  then?  shall  we  sin,  be- 
cause we  are  not  under  the  law,  but 
under  grace  ?  God  forbid." — Rom.  vi.  15. 
The  same  apostle  likewise  says:  "For 
sin  shall  not  have  dominion  over  you: 
for  ye  are  not  under  the  law,  but  under 
grace." — Rom.  vi.  14. 

We  see,  then,  that  "  Christ  is  the  end 


230      THE  METHODIST  CHURCH. 

of  the  law  for  righteousness"  to  the  be- 
liever; and,  as  his  righteousness  is  the 
righteousness  of  his  children,  and  inas- 
much, too,  as  his  righteousness  is  com- 
plete, it  follows  necessarily  that  his  chil- 
dren are  safe.  So  long,  therefore,  as  the 
law  has  no  claims  against  Christ,  it  can- 
not possibly  have  any  against  his  chil- 
dren. They,  then,  are  just  as  safe  as 
Christ  is,  for  they  are,  in  the  expressive 
language  of  the  Apostle  Paul,  ''joint 
heirs  with  Christ" — have  just  as  perfect 
a  title  to  heaven  as  he  has.  As  long, 
therefore,  as  Christ  is  secure,  the  Chris- 
tian is  secure.  The  Divine  government 
can  make  no  demand  upon  the  Christian 
until  the  Surety  fails.  But  it  cannot 
fail,  for  it  is  perfect;  therefore  the  Chris- 
tian is  forever  safe. 

3.  From  the  vital  relation  which  the 
Christian  sustains  to  Christ. 

The  Christian  is  his  child;  is  ''born 
again  "  into  his  family  or  kingdom ;  is  a 


THE   METHODIST   CHURCH.  231 

member  of  his  body;  is  an  integral 
part  of  the  great  spiritual  temple.  "  Ye 
must  be  born  again." — John  iii.  7.  *'  For 
we  are  members  of  his  body,  of  his  iiesli, 
and  of  his  bones." — Eph.  v.  30.  "Know 
ye  not  that  ye  are  the  temple  of  God  ? " 
—1  Cor.  iii.  16. 

Moreover,  the  connection  between 
Christ  and  the  Christian  is  compared  to 
that  which  subsists  between  the  vine  and 
the  branches.  "I  am  the  vine,  ye  are 
the  branches.  He  that  abideth  in  me, 
and  I  in  him,  the  same  bringeth  forth 
much  frnit;  for  without  me  ye  can  do 
nothing." — John  xv.  5.  What  a  close, 
what  a  vital  relation  ! 

Again,  so  tender  and  so  intimate  is 
the  relation  between  the  blessed  Saviour 
and  the  child  of  God,  that  the  life  of  the 
latter  is  said  to  be  "  hid  with  Christ  in 
God."  "For  ye  are  dead,  and  your  life 
is  hid  with  Christ  in  God.  When  Christ, 
who  is  our  life,  shall  appear,  then  shall 


232      THE  METHODIST  CHURCH. 

ye  also  appear  \vitli  him  in  glory." — CoL 
iii.  3,  4.  Since,  then,  Christ  is  ''the  life" 
of  the  Christian,  and  since,  too,  that 
"life  is  hid  with  Christ  in  God,"  how 
can  it  be  lost?  Can  Satan  find  and  bring 
to  ruin  such  a  life?  No,  indeed!  Why, 
he  could  not  even  find  the  body  of  Moses, 
which  God  had  hid,  though  he  (Satan) 
endeavored  to  compel  Michael  the  arch- 
angel to  discover  it  to  him.  (See  Jude  9.) 
Then,  how  on  earth  is  he  to  find  the 
Christian's  life  which  is  hid,  not  in  the 
earth,  but  '^  with  ^Christ  in  God  V  Can 
he,  wdth  his  fiendish  army,  storm  the 
bulwarks  of  heaven?  Can  he  force  his 
way  through  that  invincible  host  of 
angelic  legions  which,  as  a  great  body- 
guard, stand  sentinel  at  the  gate  of 
heaven?  Yet  more  than  this  he  would 
have  to  do  before  he  could  reach  the 
Christian,  for  he  would  have  to  lay  open 
the  Father's  heart,  and  then  wring  from 
the  Saviour's  grasp  the  sacred  treasure! 


THE   METHODIST   CHURCH.  2^^ 

•Can  he  do  it?  The  question  is  almost 
^n  insult  to  humanity ^  much  more  to  Di- 
vinity. Satan  do  such  a  thing?  ISTo, 
never,  never,  never!  "How  can  one  enter 
into  a  strong  man's  house,  and  spoil  his 
goods,  except  he  first  bind  the  strong 
man?"— Matt.  xii.  29. 

4.  From  the  constant  indAvelling  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  heart  of  the 
'Christian. 

The  Holy  Ghost  is  one  of  the  prime 
.agents  in  the  w^ork  of  salvation.  He 
not  only  convinces  us  of  our  sin  and 
-misery,  enlightens  our  minds  in  the 
knowledge  of  Christ,  and  applies  to  our 
hearts  the  redemption  purchased  by  the 
Son  of  God,  but  he  divells  in  the  heart 
of  every  one  from  whom  the  evil  spirit 
has  been  cast  out.  "I  will  pray  the 
Father,  and  he  shall  give  you  another 
Comforter,  that  he  may  abide  with  you 
for  ever." — John  xiv.  16.  To  show,  too, 
that  this  gift  of  the  Spirit  was  not  pe- 


234  THE   METHODIST   CHURCH. 

culiar  to  the  apostles,  we  read:  ''If  any 
man  (any  Christian)  have  not  the  Spirit 
of  Christ,  he  is  none  of  his." — Eom. 
viii.  9. 

The  Spirit,  then,  does  not  enter  the 
hearts  of  Christians  as  a  transient  visitor, 
but  to  "  abide  with  them  forever."  For 
this  reason,  Christians  are  called  "the 
temple  of  God,  because  the  Spirit  of  God 
divelleth  in  them."  By  this  constant 
abiding  of  the  Spirit,  Christians  are  not 
only  comforted,  but  they  are  assisted  in 
their  infirmities;  yea,  are  "sealed  to  the 
day  of  redemption."  "Likewise  the 
Spirit  also  helpeth  our  infirmities :  for 
we  know  not  what  we  should  pray  for 
as  we  ought :  but  the  Spirit  itself  maketh 
intercession  for  us  with  groanings  which 
cannot  be  uttered." — Rom.  viii.  26 
This  Spirit,  too,  is  given  to  the  Chris- 
tians "  as  an  earnest  of  their  inheritance.'* 
Now,  we  all  know  what  "an  earnest" 
is;  it  is  a  part  given  as  a  security   that 


THE  METHODIST  CHURCH.      235 

the  whole  shall  be  given.  Since,  then, 
the  Spirit  is  given  as  "an  earnest"  of 
the  "inheritance"  of  Christians,  if  they 
can  fall  from  grace  and  lose  that  "inher- 
itance," then,  God's  security  (the  Holy 
Ghost)  has  failed!  But  how  can  he  fail? 
He  is  one  of  the  three  persons  in  the 
Godhead;  yea,  is  God!  What  better 
security,  then,  could  the  Christian  ask? 

5.  From  the  intercession  of  Christ, 
and  from  his  anxiety  and  ability  to  save 
his  followers. 

In  speaking  of  Christ,  the  Bible  says : 
"He  ever  liveth  to  make  intercession  for 
them." — Heb.  vii.  25.  "If  any  man  sin, 
we  have  an  advocate  with  the  Father, 
Jesus  Christ  the  righteous." — 1  John  ii,  1. 
What  is  the  nature  of  the  "  intercession  " 
which  he  makes  for  his  children?  The 
answer  is  at  hand:  he  prays  for  them 
just  as  he  did  for  Peter,  "that  their  faith 
fail  not."  We  have  a  specimen  of  his 
prayers:    "Holy   Father,   keep  through 


236  THE    METHODIST   CHURCH. 

thiue  own  name  those  whom  thou  hast 
given  me,  that  they  may  be  one,  as  we 
are."  "I  pray  not  that  thou  shouldest 
take  them  out  of  the  world,  but  that 
thou  shouldest  keep  them  from  the  evil. 
They  are  not  of  the  w^orld,  even  as  I  aln 
not  of  the  world.  Sanctify  them  through 
thy  truth:  thy  word  is  truth." — John 
xvii.  11, 15-17.  Lest,  too,  some  one  might 
say  that  that  prayer  was  only  for  his 
disciples,  or  for  siich  as  had  already  be- 
lieved on  him,  he  says:  "E"either  pray  I 
for  these  alone,  but  for  them  also  which 
shall  believe  on  me  through  their  word." 
— John  xvii.  20.  If  there  is  efficacy  in  the 
prayers  of  the  Saviour,  then  all  his  chil- 
dren will  be  saved.  And  that  there  is 
efficacy  in  those  prayers,  we  have  the 
testimony  of  Christ  himself:  ''Father,  I 
thank  thee  that  thou  hast  heard  me. 
And  I  knew  that  thou  hearest  me 
always." — John  xi.  41,  42. 

His  anxiety  for  the  eternal  salvation 


THE  METHODIST  CHURCH.      237 

of  his  followers  is  likewise  assured  in 
the  Scriptures.  "Father,  I  will  that 
they  also,  whom  thou  hast  given  me,  be 
with  me  where  I  am;  that  they  may 
behold  my  glory,  which  thou  hast  given 
me." — John  xvii.  24.  The  Father,  too, 
has  the  same  solicitude.  "And  this  is 
the  Father's  will  which  hath  sent  me, 
that  of  all  which  he  hath  given  me  I 
should  lose  nothing,  but  should  raise  it 
up  again  at  the  last  day." — John  vi.  39. 
The  truth  is,  the  entire  history  of  Christ 
— his  birth,  sufferings,  and  death — would 
be  without  meaning,  if  this  deep,  abid- 
ing anxiety  for  his  followers  had  not 
existed.  Will  he  not,  then,  "  see  of  the 
travail  of  his  soul  and  be  satisfied?"  It 
must  be  so,  for  to  him,  in  an  especial 
manner,  is  committed  the  "keeping"  of 
his  children. 

Let  us  now  for  a  moment  inquire  as  to 
his  ability  in  securing  the  everlasting 
salvation  of  his  people. 


238      THE  METHODIST  CHURCH. 

Paul  says:  "Wherefore  he  is  able  also 
to  save  them  to  the  uttermost  that  come 
unto  God  by  him." — Heb.  vii.  25.  Again : 
"^ow  unto  him  that  is  able  to  keep  you 
trom  falling,  and  to  present  you  faultless 
before  the  presence  of  his  glory  with 
exceeding  joy,  to  the  only  wise  God  our 
Saviour,  be  glory  and  majesty,  dominion 
and  power,  both  now  and  ever.  Amen." 
Jude  24,  25. 

Having  seen  what  the  power  of  Christ 
as  an  intercessor  is,  and  having  seen,  also, 
that  he  is  not  only  anxious  to  save  his 
children,  but  is  able  to  do  so,  the  ques- 
tion arises.  Will  he  do  it?  But  one  an- 
swer can  be  given :  He  will.  Would  not  a 
kind,  pure  father  save  a  child  from  ruin 
if  he  had  the  ability?  We  will  not  in- 
sult the  intelligence  of  the  reader  by 
answ^ering  such  a  question.  But  the  case 
under  consideration  is  a  much  stronger 
one,  for  no  father  loves  his  children  a? 
tenderly  as  Christ  loves  his  children. 


THE  METHODIST  CHURCH.      239 

6.  From  positive  declarations  of  the 
Scriptures. 

The  Bible  is  literally  full  of  positive 
assertions  that  the  truly  regenerated  soul 
will  be  saved.  So  numerous,  indeed,  are 
they  that  we  scarcely  know  where  to 
begin;  but  we  have  space  for  only  a  few. 

"Whosoever  drinketh  of  this  water 
shall  thirst  again :  but  whosoever  drink- 
eth of  the  water  that  I  shall  give  him 
shall  never  thirst;  but  the  water  that  I 
shall  give  him  shall  be  in  him  a  well  of 
water  springing  up  into  everlasting  life." 
—John  iv.  13,  14. 

''Verily,  verily  I  say  unto  you,  He 
that  heareth  my  word,  and  believeth  on 
him  that  sent  me,  hath  everlasting  life, 
and  shall  not  come  into  condemnation; 
but  is  passed  from  death  unto  life." — 
John  V.  24. 

"God  is  faithful,  who  will  not  sufier 
you  to  be  tempted  above  that  ye  are 
able;  but  will  with  the  temptation  also 


240      THE  METHODIST  CHURCH. 

make  a  way  to  escape,  that  ye  may  be 
able  to  bear  it."— 1  Cor.  x.  13. 

"There  is  therefore  dow  no  condem- 
nation to  them  which  are  in  Christ  Jesus, 
who  walk  not  after  the  flesh,  but  after 
the  Spirit.  For  the  law  of  the  Spirit  of 
life  in  Christ  Jesus  hath  made  me  free 
from  the  law  of  sin  and  death." — Rom. 
viii.  1,  2. 

"I  am  the  good  shepherd:  the  good 
shepherd  giveth  his  life  for  the  sheep." 
"My  sheep  hear  my  voice,  and  I  know 
them,  and  they  follow  me:  and  I  give 
unto  them  eternal  life;  and  they  shall 
never  perish,  neither  shall  any  man 
pluck  them  out  of  my  hand.  My  Father, 
which  gave  them  me,  is  greater  than  all ; 
and  no  man  is  able  to  pluck  them  out 
of  my  father's  hand."— John  x.  11,  27-29. 

"For  if,  when  we  were  enemies,  we 
were  reconciled  to  God  by  the  death  of 
his  Son,  much  more,  being  reconciled, 
we  shall  be  saved  by  his  life." — Rom.  v.  10. 


THE   METHODIST   CHURCH.  241 

"  He  that  believetli  on  me  hath  ever- 
lasting life." — John  vi.  47. 

'•  Who  shall  separate  us  from  the  love 
of  Christ?  shall  tribulation,  or  distress, 
or  persecution,  or  famine,  or  nakedness, 
or  peril,  or  sword  ?  "  "  Nay,  in  all  these 
things  we  are  more  than  conquerors 
through  him  that  loved  us.  For  I  am 
persuaded,  that  neither  death,  nor  life, 
nor  angels,  nor  principalities,  nor  pow- 
ers, nor  things  present,  nor  things  to 
come,  nor  height,  nor  depth,  nor  any 
other  creature,  shall  be  able  to  separate  us 
from  the  love  of  God,  which  is  in  Christ 
Jesus  our  Lord." — Eom.  viii.  35,  37-39. 

We  have  given  the  foregoing  without 
"  note  or  comment,"  for  they  need 
neither,  and  it  would  be  an  easy  matter 
to  give  a  hundred  more  of  the  same; 
kind,  but  want  of  space  forbids.  We- 
cannot  close  this  discussion,  however,, 
without  making  one  additional  remark.. 
We  have  positive  testimony  from  ther 
16 


Ii42  THE    METHODIST    CHURCH. 

Bible  that  many  of  the  righteous  are  in 
heaven,  and  that  many  of  the  wicked 
are  in  hell ;  but  no  man  can  say  on  the 
authority  of  the  Scriptures  that  an  un- 
regenerated  soul  ever  went  to  heaven,  or 
that  a  truly  regenerated  person  ever  went 
to  hell. 

From  the  foregoing,  therefore,  we  can 
readily  see  why  the  founders  of  the 
Cumberland  Presbyterian  Church  did 
not  cast  their  lot  with  the  Methodists. 


OTHER   CHURCHES.  243 


CHAPTER  XII. 

OTHER   CHURCHES. 

Although  we  have  examined  into  the 
doctrines  and  usages  of  a  number  of 
Churches,  there  yet  remains  quite  a  list. 
JBut  in  view  of  the  fact  that  these  hold 
to  doctrines  and  usages  with  slight  modi- 
fications from  those  which  have  been 
stated  and  commented  upon  in  previous 
-chapters  in  this  little  book,  it  is  deemed 
unnecessary  to  consider  any  of  them  at 
length. 

THE  LUTHERANS. 

This  denomination  takes  its  name 
from  Martin  Luther,  the  great  German 
reformer,  who  was  born  1483,  in  Saxony. 
There    are    different     kinds     of    Luth- 


244  OTHER   CHUECHES. 

erans — Evangelical  and  High  Sj^mboli- 
cal  Lutherans.  They  difier,  too,  in 
Church  polity — some  of  them  a  kind 
of  Presbyterianism,  and  some  a  kind 
of  Episcopacy.  All  of  them,  however, 
cling  to  those  old  "symbolical  books"; 
and  those  books,  as  we  all  know,  teach 
the  do.ctrine  of  "baptismal  regenera 
tion" — that  the  soul  is  regenerated  in 
the  act  of  water  baptism.  Many  of 
them,  it  is  true,  will  tell  you  that  they 
do  not  thus  believe;  but  it  is  in  their 
Church  standards,  and,  if  they  really  do 
not  believe  the  doctrine,  they  ought  to 
change  their  written  Creeds. 

THE    CONGREGATIONALISTS. 

It  is  rather  difficult  to  give  the  date 
of  the  origin  of  this  Church.  It  is  gen- 
erally believed,  however,  that  it  began 
in  1608,  in  England,  and  that  Rev.  James 
Robinson  was  its  founder.  The  very 
name  of  the  Church  shows  that,  like  the 


OTHER   CnURCKES.  .245 

Baptists,  the  members  recognize  no 
higher  ecclesiastical  authority  than  the 
individual  churches.  This  Church  also 
believes  in  the  doctrine  of  election  and 
predestination.  Both  these  points,  how- 
ever, have  already  been  considered,  and 
it  is  not  necessary  to  repeat  the  argument. 

THE   CAMPBELLITES. 

This  denomination  calls  itself  the 
"  Christian  Church''^;  but  it  has  no  right 
to  assume  such  a  name.  What  would  be 
thought  of  a  political  organization  that 
would  assume  the  name  "Honest  Party," 
or  "  Patriotic  Party  "  ?  The  world  would 
laugh  it  to  scorn.  But  such  a  thing 
would  not  be  more  ridiculous  than  foi 
Campbellites  to  assume  the  name  ''  Chris- 
tian Church.'^  If  the  name  has  any  sig- 
nificance, the  meaning  is,  this  Church — 
the  ^'Christian  Church'' — is  the  Church 
of  Christ,  and  no  othi^r  is  I  Who  ever 
heard  of  such  arrogance? 


246  OTHER   CHURCHES. 

When  the  Cumberland  Presbyterian 
Church  was  organized,  there  were  no 
Campbellites;  but  if  there  had  been, 
there  is  not  the  most  remote  probability 
that  their  claims  would  have  been  seri- 
ously considered. 

Alexander  Campbell,  of  Virginia,  was 
the  founder  of  this  sect;  and  for  a  num- 
ber of  years,  was  a  minister  in  the  Bap- 
tist Church.  He,  however,  was  excluded 
from  that  Church ;  after  which  he  organ- 
ized what  is  now  known  as  the  Camp- 
bellite  Church. 

As  to  the  system  of  doctrines  to  which 
they  adhere,  it  is  exceedingly  difficult, 
on  many  points,  to  tell;  for  they  have  no 
written  Creed — no  book  which  gives 
their  doctrines  in  a  S3^stematic  form. 
They  boast  that  their  "Creed"  is  the 
Bible ;  but  if  that  be  true,  why  is  it  that 
we  have  such  a  variety  of  teachings 
among  the  membership  of  that  Church? 
If  the   Bible  is  their   Creed,   and   they 


OTHER   CHURCHES.  247 

all  understand  it  as  well  as  they  jirofess 
to,  why  is  it  that  they  are  not  a  unit  on 
doctrine  and  usage?  Every  one,  how- 
ever, who  has  investigated  the  matter, 
knows  that  no  such  unity  of  sentiment 
exists.  The  remark  is  not  made  in  an 
irreverent  spirit,  but  w^e  could  have  very 
little  respect  for  the  Bible,  if  we  thought 
that  the  vagaries  and  contradictions  of 
Campbellism  were  taught  in  it.  The 
truth  is,  that  Church,  upon  the  whole,  is 
a  singular  affair.  Every  man  preaches 
who  wishes  to  do  so;  and,  as  the  denom- 
ination has  no  "written  Creed,"  every 
one,  it  seems,  makes  his  own  theological 
system !  Who,  for  instance,  knows  the 
sentiments  of  that  Church,  as  a  whole, 
in  regard  to  the  Trinity,  the  Holy  Ghost, 
the  sacred  Scriptures,  the  Atonement,  the 
sacrament  of  the  Supper,  Predestination, 
Repentance,  Faith,  Regeneration,  Crea- 
tion, Providence,  Fall  of  Man,  Deprav- 
ity, etc.  ?    N'o  one  on  earth  !    They  do  not 


248  OTHER   CHURCHES. 

know  themselves!  The  Bible  is  their 
Creed,  yet  no  human  being  can  tell  what 
the  Church,  as  a  whole,  understands  the 
Bible  to  teach  upon  the  great  and  vital 
points  just  mentioned.  Even  political 
parties  are  ashamed  to  go  before  the 
world  without  a  declaration  of  princi- 
ples— a  written  platform  or  Creed,  upon 
which  they  as  parties  stand.  What 
would  be  thought  of  a  political  organi- 
zation that  would  say,  "  the  Constitution 
is  our  Creed?"  Would  not  all  other  po- 
litical parties  say  the  same?  Most  as- 
suredly they  would.  The  party,  there- 
fore, that  claims  the  Constitution  as  its 
platform,  must  tell  the  world  what  it 
understands  the  Constitution  to  teach- 
Then,  when  a  Church  says  the  Bible  is  its 
Creed,  have  we  not  a  right  to  ask  that 
Church  what  it  understands  the  Bible  to 
teach  upon  the  great  and  fundamental 
ioctrines  of  our  religion?  Away,  then, 
with    such    a  subterfuge  as  the    Camp- 


OTHER   CHURCHES.  249 

bellites   resort   to    upon    the   subject  of 
Creeds ! 

On  the  mode  and  design  of  water  bap- 
tism, there  is,  perhaps,  greater  unity  in 
that  Church  than  upon  any  other  two 
subjects.  They  recognize  no  mode, 
judging  from  their  practice,  except  im- 
mersion. Now,  in  a  previous  chapter. 
-we  examined  all  the  cases  of  water  bap- 
tism reported  in  detail  in  the  ]N"ew  Testa- 
ment, and  we  failed  to  find  a  single  case 
where  immersion  was  probable.  In  re- 
gard to  the  design  of  water  baptism,  the 
Campbellites  teach,  judging  from  their 
plan  of  "making  disciples,"  that  baptism 
is  for  the  remission  of  sins;  that  is,  there 
is  no  remission  of  sins  without  baptism 
— ^baptism,  too,  by  immersion!  How 
can  any  one  believe  such  a  doctrine? 
Does  any  one  really  believe  it,  or  is  it  a 
delusion  ?  It  is  the  soul  of  man  that  is 
depraved;  how,  then,  in  the  name  of 
reason  and  common  sense,  can  an  external 


250  OTHER   CHURCHES. 

ordinance,  cleanse  and  purify  an  internal 
nature — a  nature  which  it  cannot,  by  any 
possibility,  reach?  But,  perhaps  some 
one  is  ready  to  say,  the  water  does  not 
purify,  it  is  the  Holy  Spirit  operating 
through  the  water  that  does  the  cleansing,^ 
the  purifying.  Is  that  so?  and  is  it  im- 
possible for  sins  to  be  pardoned,  except 
through  the  agency  of  water  baptism? 
Cannot  the  Holy  Ghost  reach  the  soul  in 
conversion  except  through  water?  Who 
can  believe  such  an  absurdity? 

Were  none  saved  during  the  Old  Test- 
ament dispensation?  If  so,  how?  E'ot 
by  the  operation  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
through  water  baptism,  for  we  all  know 
that,  until  after  the  birth  of  Christ,  water 
baptism  had  not  been  instituted.  Let 
the  reader  examine  with  care  what  Paul 
says  upon  this  subject  in  the  eleventh 
chapter  of  Hebrews.  It  is  there  said  to 
be  by  faith.  Faith,  then,  and  not  water 
baptism,  was  the  medium  through  which 


OTHER    CHURCHES.  251 

the  Holy  Ghost  purified  tlie  hearts  of  all 
who  were  saved  before  the  birth  of 
Christ.  For  about  four  thousand  years, 
therefore,  God  saved  sinners  without 
water  baptism.  He  is  an  unchangeable 
Being — the  same  yesterday,  to-day,  and 
forever.  The  method  of  saving  sinners, 
therefore,  has  never  been  changed.  How 
could  it  be  changed?  The  relation  be- 
tween God  and  the  sinner  is  the  same  to- 
day that  it  was  from  the  hour  the  prom- 
ise was  made:  "The  seed  of  the  woman 
shall  bruise  the  serpent's  head."  In 
order,  however,  that  the  reader  may  see 
how  absurd  this  doctrine  of  "salvation 
by  water"  is,  we  call  attention  to  the 
following  points :     . 

1.  It  would  make  the  salvation  of  the 
sinner  depend  upon  man.  If  the  sinner 
can  have  his  sins  pardoned  only  through 
the  agency  of  water  baptism,  then  he 
cannot  be  saved  unless  some  one  will 
baptize  him.     How  can  he?     He  cannot 


252  OTHER   CHURCHES. 

baptize  himself;    he  is  therefore  depend- 
ent upon  man  for  salvation. 

2.  It,  according  to  the  Campbellite 
Church,  confines  the  Hol}^  Ghost  to  a 
certain  mode — to  a  particular  method  of 
administering  baptism.  That  Church 
tells  us  that  there  is  no  baptism  except 
immersion.  This  doctrine,  then,  not  only 
confines  the  operations  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  in  regeneration,  to  water,  but  to 
immersion  in  water.  N'ow,  to  sustain 
their  theory,  they  must  prove  two  things : 
first,  that  the  Holy  Ghost  does  not  reno- 
vate the  heart  except  through  water  bap- 
tism ;  second,  that  the  only  mode  of 
Daptism  authorized  by  the  Scriptures  is 
immersion.  But  they  cannot,  if  it  would 
save  their  souls,  prove  either  one  of  these 
propositions. 

3.  If  this  doctrine  be  true,  then  salva- 
tion is  by  works.  If -the  heart  can  be 
regenerated  only  through  the  ordinance 
of  baptism,  then  how  can  the  sinner  be 


OTHER   CHURCHES.  253 

saved  without  works — works  performed 
by  the  minister  and  by  himself.  But 
Paul  says,  "Therefore  we  conclude  that 
a  man  is  justified  by  faith,  without  the 
deeds  of  the  law."  Again  says  he, 
"]^ot  of  works,  lest  any  man  should 
boast."  Also  the  same  apostle  says: 
"Therefore  by  the  deeds  of  the  law 
there  shall  no  fiesh  be  justified  in  his 
sight." 

4.  This  doctrine  positively  contradicts 
the  Bible.  In  the  gospel  by  John,  chap- 
ter iii.,  verse  18,  we  have  the  following: 
"He  that  believeth  on  him  (Christ)  is  not 
condemned,"  l!^ow,  every  sinner  in  his 
natural  state  is  condemned;  but,  accord- 
ing to  this  scripture,  when  he  ^^  believes  on 
Christ,"  he  is  "  not  condemned  "  ;  that  is, 
his  sins  are  pardoned — pardoned,  too^ 
because  he  believes.  Here  we  have  the 
declaration  of  Christ  himself  that  he  be- 
stows pardon  because  of  faith — does  not 
even    mention    baptism.      Again,    verse 


254  OTHER    CHURCHES 

36,  "He  that  believeth  ou  the  Son  hath 
everlasting  life."  The  Saviour  does  not 
say,  he  that  believeth  may  or  shall  have 
everlasting  life  if  he  will  be  baptized  by 
immersion;  not  a  word  of  it,  but  "he 
that  believeth"  hath  everlasting  life — 
has  it  as  soon  as  he  believes.  In  chapter 
vi., verses  35,  40,  of  the  same  gospel,  we 
have  these  words:  "And  Jesus  said  unto 
them,  I  am  the  bread  of  life:  he  that 
cometh  to  me  shall  never  hunger;  and 
he  that  believeth  on  me  shall  never 
thirst.  >i^  *  >i<  And  this  is  the  will  of 
him  that  sent  me,  that  every  one  which 
seeth  the  Son,  and  believeth  on  him,  may 
have  everlasting  life:  and  I  will  raise 
him  up  at  the  last  day."  Could  lan- 
guage be  stronger?  "E'erlasting  life"; 
and  yet  not  one  word  about  baptism  I 

Again,  when  the  convicted,  trembling 
jailer  asked,  "What  must  I  do  to  be 
saved?"  Paul  said,  "Believe  on  the 
Lord   Jesus   Christ,   and   thou    shalt   be 


OTHER   CHURCHES,  255 

saved."  Remember,  Paul  did  not  say, 
"Be  baptized,  and  thou  shalt  be  saved," 
not  a  word  of  it;  but,  ^^ Believe  on  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  thou  shalt  be 
saved."  IS'ow,  if  water  baptism  was 
necessary  to  the  jailer's  salvation,  then 
Paul  misled  him — did  not  tell  him  the 
truth.  But  who  will  dare  accuse  Paul  of 
such  a  deed? 

The  case  of  Cornelius  is,  if  possible, 
still  stronger  against  the  doctrine  of  sal- 
vation by  water.  Turn  to  Acts,  chapter 
X.,  and  read  it  with  care.  It  will  there 
be  seen  that  Peter  did  not  baptize  any 
one  until  after  "the  Holy  Ghost  fell  upon 
all  them  which  heard  the  v/ord";  until, 
in  other  words,  their  sins  had  been  par- 
doned. The  exact  language  is,  "While 
Peter  yet  spake  these  words,  the  Holy 
Ghost  fell  on  all  them  which  heard  the 
word.  And  they  of  the  circumcision 
which  believed  were  astonished,  as 
many  as  came  with   Peter,  because  that 


256  OTHER   CHURCHES. 

on  the  Gentiles  also  was  poured  out  the 
gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  For  they  heard 
them  speak  with  tongues,  and  magnify 
God.  Then  answered  Peter,  Can  any 
man  forbid  water,  that  these  should  not 
be  baptized,  which  have  received  the 
Holy  Ghost  as  well  as  we?"  Scores  of 
just  such  passages  could  be  produced, 
but  these  are  sufficient. 

Our  Campbellite  friends,  however,  will 
say  that  we  have  omitted  some  of  their 
strong  texts.  One  of  them  is  as  follows 
(John  iii.  5):  "Jesus  answered,  Yerilyy 
verily,  I  say  unto  thee.  Except  a  man  be 
born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit,  lie  can- 
not enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God." 
In  this  verse  the  Saviour  is  endeavoring 
to  explain  to  Mcodemus  how  the  ''new 
birth"  is  brought  about.  The  "water" 
spoken  of  could  not  possibly  refer  to 
Christian  baptism;  even  Alexander 
Campbell,  the  founder  of  the  Campbellite 
Church,  admits  that  at  the  time  this  Ian- 


OTHER   CHURCHES.  257 

gusige  was  used,  Christian  baptism  was 
not  in  existence.  The  Saviour,  therefore, 
could  not  have  intended  to  try  to  exphiin 
a  matter  to  I^icodemus  by  referring  to 
something  which  Mcodemus  did  not 
understand.  But  he  did  expect  ^icode- 
mus  to  understand  him;  for  he  says  to 
him,  "Art  thou  a  master  (teacher)  of  Is- 
rael, and  knowest  not  these  things?" 
He  thought  it  strange  that  iN'icodemus 
should  be  a  teacher  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, and  yet  be  ignorant  of  the  matter 
which  he  was  trying  to  explain  to  him. 
It  is  therefore  evident  that  the  doctrine 
taught  by  the  Saviour,  is  taught  in  the 
Old  Testament,  else  he  would  not  have 
reproved  Nicodemus  for  not  understand- 
ing it.  Now,  no  one  will  say  that  water 
baptism,  for  the  remission  of  sins,  is 
taught  in  the  Old  Testament.  Hence, 
such  could  not  have  been  the  meaning  of 
the  Saviour.  But  the  doctrine  of  a 
change  of  heart  (regeneration)  is  taught 
17 


258  OTHER   CHURCHES. 

in  the  Old  Testament.  In  Ezekiel  we  read 
(chapter  xxxvi.  26) :    "A  new  heart  also 
will  I  give  you,  and  a  new  spirit  will  I 
put  within  you:     and  I  will  take  away 
the   stony    heart    of    your    flesh,"    etc. 
Again,     David    prayed     (Psa.     li.    10) ; 
" Create  in  me  a  clean  heart,  0  God;  and 
renew  a  right  spirit  within  me."     The 
Saviour  was  then   simply  teaching  the 
necessity  of  a  "new  heart"  by  the  puri- 
fying power  of   the  Holy   Ghost.     We, 
then,  are  not  to  understand  by  the  water 
and  the  Spirit,  in  the  verse  referred  to, 
two  different  things;  for  it  is  evidently  a 
form  of  expression  signifying  the  cleans- 
ing   or    purifying   power   of    the   Holy 
Spirit  under  the  similitude  of  water.     In 
Matt.  iii.  11,  it  is  said:  " He  shall  baptize 
you  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  with  fire." 
Here   the  Holy  Ghost  and  fire  do  not 
mean  two  things,  but  one,  viz. :  the  Holy 
Ghost  under  the  similitude  of  fire,  refin- 
ing and  purifying  the  whole.     There  is, 


OTHER   CHURCHES.  259 

therefore,  nothiug  in  this  verse  to  sustain 
the  doctrine  of  "  water  baptism  for  the 
remission  of  sins." 

Let  us  next  examine  another  passage 
upon  which  our  Campbellite  friends  so 
confidently  rely.  It  reads  as  follows 
(Acts  ii.  38):  '-Then  Peter  said  unto 
them,  Repent,  and  be  baptized  every  one 
of  you  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  for 
the  remission  of  sins,  and  ye  shall  receive 
the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  These 
words  were  spoken  by  Peter.  They 
constitute  a  part,  too,  of  that  ever  mem- 
orable sermon  preached  by  him  on  the 
day  of  Pentecost.  In  that  discourse  he 
was  exceedingly  severe  upon  the  Jews, 
because  they  had  not  only  rejected 
Jesus  Christ  as  the  Saviour  of  tbe 
world,  but  "had  by  wicked  hands"  cru- 
citied  him.  Peter's  words  were  so 
pointed  and  so  true,  tbat  the  Jews  were 
"pricked  in  the  heart."  In  their  deep 
sorrow  and  anguish,  they  asked,  "  What 


260  OTUER   CHURCHES. 

shall  we  do?"     Peter  then  used  the  lan^ 
^uage  which  has  been  quoted. 

Let  us  briefly  look  at  the  facts  in  the 
case.  The  Jews  believed  in  the  Father 
and  in  the  Holy  Ghost.;  but  had  rejected 
Christ  as  the  Saviour.  Their  great  sin^ 
therefore,  consisted  in  refusing  to  receive 
Christ  as  the  promised  Messiah.  Peter^ 
liowever,  knew  that  there  was  no  possi- 
ble way  to  be  saved  except  by  receiving 
and  relying  upon  Christ  for  salvation. 
The  burden  of  his  sermon  waa  on  this 
point.  The  Jews,  as  he  knevv%  needed 
light  upon  this  subject.  He,  therefore, 
said,  ''Repent,  and  be  baptized  every 
one  of  you  in  the  name  of  Jesus- 
Christ,"  etc.,  which  was  equivalent 
to  saying,  "You  cannot  be  saved 
without  Christ;  he  is  your  only  hope 
for  salvation;  and  you  must  publicly 
acknowledge  him  in  your  baptism,  hj 
having  his  name  in  the  baptismal  for- 
mula,  thereby   showing   that    you    now 


OTHER   CHURCHES.  261 

receive  him  and  trust  him,  though  you 
once  rejected  him." 

There  are,  therefore,  only  two  points 
in  the  case — a  repentance  and  a  baptism 
looking  to  Christ  alone  for  their  efficacy. 
Without  these,  Peter  tells  them  that  the 
whole  thing  will  amount  to  nothing — can 
be  no  remission  of  sins — no  receiving  of 
the  Holy  Ghost.  ]S"ow,  if  Peter  had  in- 
tended to  teach  that  water  baptism  was 
to  save  them, he  would  certainly  have  in- 
sisted that  it  should  be  administered  in 
the  regular  form — would  have  said  "  Re- 
pent, and  be  baptized  in  the  name  of  the 
Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost";  but  he 
said  no  such  thing,  for  the  simple 
reason  that  he  was  not  discussing  the 
efficacy  of  water  baptism.  All  that 
he  meant,  therefore,  was,  ''repent  of 
your  sins,"  relying  on  Christ  for  salva- 
tion; and,  in  receiving  the  ordinance 
of  baptism,  see  to  it  that  the  name 
of   Christ,  as  well  as  the  name  of  tlie 


262  OTHER   CHURCHES. 

Father  and  tlie  Holy  Ghost  is  in  it,  el^e 
the  whole  thing — your  repentance  and 
baptism — will  be  worthless;  will  secure 
no  "remission  of  sins,"  or  "gift  of  the 
Holy  Ghost."  Then  where,  in  this  pas- 
sage, do  we  find  the  doctrine  taught  by 
the  Campbellite  Church?  In  the  same 
way  we  could  prove  that  the  other  pas- 
sages, on  which  they  rely,  utterly  fail, 
when  properly  understood,  to  teach  the 
doctrine  which  that  Church  advocates. 
Moreover,  if  this  doctrine  be  true,  why 
did  Paul  place  the  estimate  which  he  did 
upon  water  baptism?  In  the  first  epistle 
to  the  Corinthians,  chapter  i.  14-17,  he 
says :  "  I  thank  God  that  I  baptized  none 
of  you,  but  Crispus  and  Gains;  lest  any. 
should  say  that  I  had  baptized  in  mine 
own  name.  And  I  baptized  also  the 
household  of  Stephanas :  besides,  I  know 
not  whether  I  baptized  any  other.  For 
Christ  sent  me  not  to  baptize,  but  to 
preach  the  gospel :    not  with  wisdom  of 


OTHER    CHURCHES.  263 

words,  lest  the  cross  of  Christ  should  be 
made  of  none  effect." 

]S"ow,  if  sins  can  be  forgiven  only  by 
or  through  water  baptism,  why  did  Paul 
utter  the  words  which  have  just  been 
quoted?  Would  he  have  thanked  God 
that  he  had  baptized  such  a  small  num- 
ber? 1^0,  never!  What!  thank  God 
that  he  had  instrumentally  saved  only  a 
few  sinners?  Yet  he  certainly  did  thus 
rejoice,  if  there  is  no  remission  of  sins 
without  baptism!  But  who  can  believe 
such  an  absurdity?  The  reason  for  his 
comparative  indifference  upon  the  subject 
is  fully  explained  in  the  seventeenth 
verse:  "For  Christ  sent  me  not  to  bap- 
tize, but  to  preach  the  gospel."  Ah !  that 
is  it!  The  great  object  of  his  mission 
was  to  preach;  to  induce  sinners  to  be- 
come Christians  by  believing,  not  by  being 
baptized  with  water,  nor  in  water 
either,  for  neither  mode  could  save 
them,  as  Paul  very  well  knew.     Away, 


264  OTHER   CHURCHES. 

then,     with    the    dogma    of    baptismal 
regeneration ! 

One  more  brief  item  will  close  our 
criticism  upon  this  denomination.  From 
its  origin  it  has  been  a  proselyting 
Church.  Its  ministers  have  gone  into 
other  ecclesiastical  communions — other 
Churches — and  have  done  all  in  their 
power  to  unsettle  the  faith  of  those 
belonging  thereto.  Of  a  truth  may  it 
be  said,  "  They  compass  land  and  sea  to 
make  one  proselyte."  To  some  extent 
they  have  succeeded,  but  whether  they 
have  done  any  good  thereby  is  the  ques 
tion.  That  they  have  produced  discord, 
jargons,  and  "contentions  without  a 
cause,"  there  is  no  doubt.  The  truth  is, 
like  Ishmael  of  old,  "  their  hand  is  against 
every  man" — against  all  who  do  not 
agree  with  them !  Such  a  Church,  even 
if  it  had  been  in  existence  at  the  time, 
could  not  have  satisfied  the  founders  of 
the  Cumberland  Presbyterian  Church. 


OUMBERLAND  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH.    265 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

THE     CUMBERLAND      PRESBYTERIAN     CHURCH. 

Having  given  in  previous  chapters  a 
brief  summary  of  the  origin,  doctrines, 
usages,  etc.,  of  the  other  leading  denom- 
inations of  Christendom,  it  is  now  pro- 
posed to  do  the  same  thing  in  relation  to 
the  Cumberland  Presbj^terian  Church. 
lN"or  is  it  necessary  that  this,  the  con- 
cluding chapter  of  this  little  book, 
should  be  a  very  lengthy  one,-  for  the 
reader  is  very  well  informed  as  to  the 
origin  of  said  Church,  and  the  same  is 
true  likewise,  to  a  great  extent,  in  refer- 
ence to  its  doctrines;  the  latter  having 
been  learned  by  reading  the  criticisms 


266    CUMBERLAND  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH. 

made    upon    the    tenets    of    other    de- 
nominations. 

I. — ITS    ORIGIN. 

As  has  been  said,  this  Church  was  or- 
ganized February  4,  1810,  in  Dickson 
County,  Tennessee.  It  is,  therefore,  to 
the  "manor  born" — is  an  American 
Church.  And,  though  it  does  not  num- 
ber its  years  by  centuries,  as  some  others 
do;  yet,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  free 
from  the  imperfections  and  decrepitude 
generally  incident  to  old  age.  The- 
three  ministers  who  organized  it — King^ 
Ewing,  and  McAdow — were  men  of  un- 
blemished Christian  character  and  in- 
tegrity. 

It  is  also  true  that  this  Church,  as  w& 
have  seen,  was  born  in  the  great  revival 
of  1800,  one  of  the  most  gracious  out- 
pourings of  the  Holy  Ghost  that  this^ 
country  ever  witnessed.  It  was,  there- 
fore, begotten  and  brought  forth  under 


CUMBERLAND  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH.    267 

the  purifying  and  sanctifying  inflnences 
of  the  blessed  Spirit  of  God.  To  that 
revival  spirit,  too,  the  Church  has, 
throughout  its  history,  adhered  with  the 
greatest  tenacity. 

II. — ITS    THEOLOGICAL    POSITION. 

The  Cumberland  Presbyterian  Church 
claims  to  occupy  what  it  denominates 
the  ^'Medium  System  of  Theology" — a 
middle  ground  between  Calvinism  and 
Arminianism.  The  two  latter  systems 
(Calvinism  and  Arminianism)  as  we  all 
know,  are  regarded  as  the  extremes  of 
theology.  It  is  also  claimed  by  the  ad- 
vocates of  these  systems  that  there  is 
no  medium  ground;  that  every  one 
must  either  be  a  Calvinist  or  an  Armin- 
ian  in  his  religious  belief,  else  he  is 
nothing;  but  such  an  assertion,  when  we 
analyze  it,  is  absurd — might  as  well  say 
that  there  is  no  territory  between  the 
North  and  South  Poles,  or  that  there  is 


/" 


268    CUMBERLAND  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH. 

no  space  between  the  extreme  ends  of  a 
platform !  How  could  tliose  two  systems 
be  the  extremes  of  theology  without  hav- 
ing this  intermediate  area — this  medium 
ground? 

But  let  us  examine  those  systems  (Cal- 
vinism and  Arminianism),  and  see  if 
there  is  not  a  theological  medium  ground. 

1.  The  Doctrine  of  Election.  Calvin- 
ism  teaches  that  election  is  uncondi- 
tional. Arminianism  teaches  that  there 
is  no  election  in  this  life.  Medium  Sys- 
tem teaches  that  there  is  an  election,  but 
that  it  is  conditional. 

2.  The  Doctrine  of  Salvation.  Calvin- 
ism teaches  that  salvation  is  uncondi- 
tional to  sinners,  but  certain  to  Chris- 
tians. Arminianism  teaches  that  salva- 
tion is  conditional  to  sinners,  but  uncer- 
tain to  Christians.  Medium  System 
teaches  that  salvation  is  conditional  to 
sinners,  but  certain  to  Christians. 

3.  The  Date  of  Election.     Calvinism 


CUMBERLAND  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH.    269 

teaches  that  the  date  of  election  is  before 
man  was  created.  Arminianism  teaches 
that  the  date  of  election  is  not  prior  to 
the  death  of  the  Christian,  if  indeed  it 
occurs  then.  Medium  System  teaches 
that  the  date  of  election  is  the  moment 
when  the  sinner  is  regenerated. 

4.  The  Extent  of  the  Atonement. 
Calvinism  teaches  that  Christ  died  for 
only  a  part  of  the  human  race — that  sal- 
vation is  not  possible  to  all,  and  that 
none  but  those  who  were  "elected  from 
the  foundation  of  the  world,"  will  be 
saved.  Arminianism  teaches  that  the 
atonement  of  Christ  was  made  for  all 
mankind — that  salvation  is  possible  to 
all ;  but,  as  Christians  may  fall  from 
grace,  it  is  not  certain  that  any  one  will 
be  saved.  Medium.  System  teaches  that 
the  atonement  was  made  for  all  man- 
kind— that  salvation  is  possible  to  all, 
and  that  every  one  who  has  been  truly 
reo:enerated  will  be  saved. 


270    CUMBERLAND  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH.' 

5.  The  Perseverance  of  the  Saints. 
Calvinism  teaches  that  perseverance  de- 
pends principally  upon  the  immutability 
of  the  decree  of  unconditional  election. 
Arminianism  teaches  that  perseverance 
depends  principally  upon  the  good  works 
of  the  creature.  Medium  System  teaches 
that  perseverance  depends,  not  upon  the 
immutability  of  the  decree  of  uncondi- 
tional election,  nor  upon  the  good  works 
of  the  creature,  but  upon  the  love  of 
God,  the  merits  of  Christ,  the  abiding  of 
the  Spirit,  and  the  covenant  of  grace. 

Other  points  could  be  given  wherein 
these  three  systems  difier,  but  surely 
these  are  sufficient  to  show  any  unpreju- 
diced reader  that  there  is  a  medium 
ground  between  Calvinism  and  Ar- 
minianism. On  that  medium  ground 
the  Cumberland  Presbyterian  Church 
stands;  and  it  rejoices  to  know  that  its 
foundation  is  broad  and  aecure.  l^or 
do  we  hazard  the  truth  in  saying  that 


CUMBERLAND  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH.    271 

not  only  the  Cumberland  Presbyterian 
Church  stands  upon  this  medium  ground, 
but  that  nineteen -twentieths  of  the 
Christian  world  to-day  really  occupy  the 
same  position.  How  rare  to  find  a  Cal- 
vinist  who  adopts  all  the  sentiments  of 
Calvin?  And  how  rare,  too,  to  find  an 
Arminian  who  adopts  all  the  seutiments 
of  Arminius?  Instead,  then,  of  finding 
no  ground  upon  which  to  stand  between 
these  extremes,  we  find  a  vast  area — an 
area  large  enough  to  hold  not  only  Cum- 
berland Presbyterians,  but  also  the  great 
body  of  professing  Christians  through- 
out the  world.  The  people  can  find  that 
medium  ground,  although  theologians 
may  not  be  able  to  do  so. 

TII. A     GENERAL     STATEMENT    OF     ITS    DOC- 
TRINES. 

For  a  full  and  extended  exhibit  of  the 
doctrines  of  the  denomination,  together 
with  the    Scripture    authority  therefor, 


272    CUMBERLAND  PKESBYTERIAX  CHURCH. 

the  reader  is  referred  to  the  Confession 
of  Faith  of  said  Church.  Still,  it  is  not 
considered  out  of  place  to  give  here  a 
very  brief  synopsis  or  outline. 

Passing  by  the  catalogue  of  doctrines, 
in  which  all  orthodox  Christians  sub- 
stantially agree — such  as  the  existence  of 
God,  the  Trinity,  the  authenticity  of  the 
Bible,  Creation,  Providence,  the  Fall 
of  man,  etc.,  etc. — the  Cumberland  Pres- 
byterian Church  holds  to  the  following 
doctrines:  That  Christ  died  for  the 
whole  human  race;  that  the  atonement 
is  sufficiently  broad  to  embrace  in  its 
provisions  every  son  and  daughter  of 
Adam;  that  the  Holy  Spirit  strives  with 
all;  that  the  sinner  is  saved  by  the  im- 
puted righteousness  of  Christ;  that  faith 
is  the  condition  upon  which  salvation  is 
bestowed;  that  every  truly  regenerated 
soul  will  be  saved ;  that  all  infants  dying 
in  infancy  are  regenerated  and  saved  by 
Christ,   through  the  Spirit,    so  also  are 


CUMBERLAND  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH.    273 

others  who  have  never  had  the  exercise 
of  reason,  and  who  are  incapable  of 
being  outwardly  called  by  the  ministry 
of  the  word;  that  water  baptism  is  not 
for  the  remission  of  sin,  but  is  simply  a 
sign  and  seal  of  the  covenant  of  grace; 
that  dipping  the  person  into  the  water 
is  not  necessary,  but  that  baptism  is 
rightly  administered  by  pouring  or 
sprinkling  water  upon  the  person;  that 
the  Church  of  Jesus  Christ  is  composed 
of  believing  parents  and  their  chil- 
dren ;  that  the  sacrament  of  the  Supper 
should  be  administered  to  all  Chris- 
tians of  good  standing  in  their  respec- 
tive Churches. 

The  foregoing  synopsis  is  peculiarly 
Cumberland  Presbyterian,  inasmuch  as 
no  other  Church  on  earth  teaches  these: 
doctrines  as  a  whole.  Moreover,  all 
these  points  have  been  discussed  and 
enforced  in  their  appropriate  places  in 
this  little  book.  Can  any  unbiased  mind,, 
18 


274    CUMBERLAND  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH. 

with  the  Bible  in  his  hand,  object  to  these 
doctrines? 

IV. — ITS    FORM    OF    GOVERNMENT. 

As  we  have  already  seen,  the  word 
Presbyterian  comes  from  the  Greek  noun 
Fresbuteros,  which  means  Presbyter  or 
Elder.  The  form  of  church  govern- 
ment which  the  founders  of  the  Cum- 
berland Presbyterian  Church  selected, 
is,  as  the  name  indicates,  that  of  Presby- 
terianism,  which  simply  means  a  Church 
governed  by  elders.  These  elders,  from 
the  earliest  times,  were  divided  into  two 
classes,  namely,  teaching  elders  or  min- 
isters, and  ruling  elders.  IsTor  can  any 
one,  we  think,  find  scriptural  authority 
for  any  other  form  of  church  govern- 
ment. 

When  God  directed  Moses  to  deliver 
his  people  from  Egyptian  bondage,  he 
told  him  to  ^'  Go,  and  gather  the  elders 
of  Israel  together,   and  say  unto  them, 


CUMBERLAND  PRESBYTEEIAN  CHURCH.    275 

The  Lord  God  of  your  fathers,  the  God 
of  Abraham,  of  Isaac,  and  of  Jacob, 
appeared  unto  me,  saying,  I  have  surely 
visited  you,  and  seen  that  which  is  done 
to  you  in  Egypt." — Ex.  iii.  16.  Eemem- 
ber,  Moses  was  not  told  to  go  and  ap- 
point elders,  but  "to  go  and  call  them 
together."  This  circumstance  shows 
three  things:  First,  that  the  elders  were 
already  in  existence — were  a  part  and 
parcel  of  that  grand  old  Church  which 
was  organized  in  the  family  of  Abraham ; 
second,  that  they  had  been  chosen  by 
the  people — not  appointed  by  a  Bishop 
or  any  other  one  man ;  third,  that  the 
two  classes  of  rulers,  previously  spoken 
of,  were  recognized  in  the  very  infancy 
of  the  Church. 

Moreover,  when  the  Angel  of  Death 
was  commissioned  to  perform  his  work 
of  destruction,  Moses  called  for  the 
elders  and  directed  them  to  sprinkle 
with   blood   the   lintels  of  the  doors  of 


276    CUMBERLAND  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH. 

those  who  were  to  be  saved.  Here  we 
again  see  these  two  officers. 

Again,  though  Moses  was  commanded 
to  smite  the  rock  in  Horeb,  "because  of 
the  scarcity  of  water,"  yet  he  was  nou- 
permitted  to  do  so  until  he  had  by  his 
side  the  elders  of  Israel.  The  same  offi- 
cers again. 

Likewise,  when  Moses  was  called  to 
Mount  Sinai,  where  the  Law  was  to  be 
given,  he  not  only  took  with  him  Aaron, 
Nadab,  and  Abihu,  but  also  seventy  of 
the  elders. 

Such  instances  could  be  almost  indef- 
initely multiplied,  but  these  are  enough 
to  establish  the  position  that  there  were 
two,  and  only  two,  classes  of  rulers  in 
the  primitive  Church.  We  also  have 
the  clearest  evidence  that  the  continued 
services  of  the  elders  (both  kinds)  were 
recognized  during  the  administration  of 
Joshua,  the  Judges,  and  tbe  Kings;  also 
during  the  captivity;  for  when  tbey  re- 


CUMBERLAND  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH.    277 

turned,  we  find  that  the  people  (the 
Jews)  were  governed  by  these  same 
elders.  Upon  this  point,  we  quote  from 
liev.  Samuel  Miller,  a  man  of  great 
learning,  and  a  historian  of  the  highest 
integrity.  He  says:  "While  eminent 
writers  on  Jewish  antiquities  have  dif- 
fered on  other  things,  they  are  all  per- 
fectly agreed  in  one  point — namely,  that 
in  every  synagogue  there  was  a  bench 
of  elders,  charged  with  the  whole  in- 
spection, government,  and  discipline  of 
the  synagogue,"  etc. 

The  same  is  true  of  the  Church  under 
the  IN'ew  Testament  dispensation.  Christ 
came  (as  we  have  seen  in  another  place 
in  this  little  book)  not  to  organize  a  new 
Church ;  and  there  is  nothing  more  cer- 
tain than  that  the  Jewish  synagogue  was 
the  model,  so  far  as  officers  are  concerned, 
of  the  Churches  planted  by  Christ  and 
his  apostles.  Under  the  Christian  dis- 
pensation,   both    classes    of   rulers    are 


278    CUMBERLAND  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH. 

called  elders — preaching  or  teaching  el- 
der and  ruling  elder.  Peter  says:  "The 
elders  which  are  among  you  I  exhort, 
who  am  also  an  elder." — 1  Pet.  v.  1. 
Says  Luke:  "And  when  they  had  or- 
dained them  elders  in  every  Church,"  etc. 
This  was  done  by  the  apostles,  and,  of 
course,  these  elders  were  not  preaching 
elders,  but  ruling  elders,  else  they  would 
have  had  a  large  number  of  ministers  in 
each  congregation.  But  Paul  settles  the 
matter  positively  when,  in  writing  to 
Titus,  he  says:  "For  this  cause  left  I 
thee  in  Crete,  that  thou  shouldest  set  in 
order  the  things  that  are  wanting,  and 
ordain  elders  in  every  city,  as  I  had  ap- 
pointed (instructed)  thee." — Titus  i.  5. 
In  those  days  all  Christians  living  in  a 
city  belonged  to  the  same  Church;  and 
as  elders  (several  of  them)  were  ordained 
for  each  congregation,  it  is  evident  that 
those  ordained  (not  appointed)  by  Titus 
were  rw^m^  elders.     Again:  "And  from 


CUMBERLAND  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH.    279 

MiletaSj  he  (Paul)  sent  to  Ephesus,  and 
called  the  elders  of  the  Church." — Acts 
XX.  17.  Of  this  Church  Paul  had  been 
pastor  for  a  number  of  years,  and  he 
wanted  to  see  the  ruling^  not  the  teaching, 
elders. 

Having  seen  that  the  Church  under 
both  dispensations  had  two  classes  of 
rulers — the  teaching  elder  and  the  ruling 
elder — the  question  arises,  How  was 
it  with  the  successors  of  the  apostles? 
They  most  assuredly  organized  the  same 
kind  of  Churches  that  their  predecessors 
did-^would  be  absurd  to  suppose  the 
contrary.  Then  they  organized  upon 
the  Presbyterian  plan ;  nor  do  we  find 
any  thing  to  the  contrary  until  the  third 
century.  At  that  time  we  begin  to  see 
the  influence  of  a  worldly  ambition, 
which  induced  some  ministers  of  influ- 
ential positions  to  try  to  lord  it  over 
others  who  occupied  more  humble  sta- 
tions.     From  such   wicked   beginnings, 


280    CUMBERLAND  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH. 

too,  the  power  of  the  priesthood  rose  to 
the  height  of  Papal  arrogance,  until  a 
regular  Episcopacy  (a  government  by 
Bishops)  was  established  in  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church  I 

All  other  Church  governments,  then, 
except  that  of  the  eldership  (Presbyte- 
rianism),  is,  to  say  the  least,  a  departure 
from  the  Bible  plan.  In  Presbyterian- 
ism,  as  we  have  seen,  the  people  have  a 
voice;  they,  too,  elect  the  men  through 
whom  they  speak — do  not  permit  any 
one,  not  even  a  Bishop,  to  do  that  for 
them.  According  to  the  same  system, 
too,  all  ministers  are  equal;  no  one  can 
say  to  another,  "  Go,  and  he  goeth,  and 
to  another,  come,  and  he  conieth,"  ]^or 
can  one  minister,  according  to  Presby- 
terianism,  suspend  another;  it  takes  a 
majority  of  his  brethren,  both  lay  and 
clerical,  composing  the  Presbytery,  to  do 
such  a  thing.  Then,  too,  a  minister  or  a 
layman  has  the  power  of  appeal  from  a 


CUMBERLAND  PEESBYTERIAN  CHURCH.    281 

lower  to  a  higher  court,  until  the  very 
highest  court  has  been  reached;  just  as 
he  can  do  in  our  civil  courts.  Who, 
then,  we  inquire,  can  object  to  the  Form 
of  Government  of  the  Camberland  Pres- 
byterian Church?  Is  it  not,  we  ask  in 
all  candor,  greatly  superior  to  Episco- 
pacy? Is  there  not  something  in  Episco- 
pacy against  which  the  heart  of  an  inde- 
pendent man  instinctively  revolts? 

V. ITS    REVIVAL    SPIRIT    AND   ITS   PROGRESS. 

The  Cumberland  Presbyterian  Church, 
.as  we  have  seen,  was  horn  in  a  revival, 
^and  at  no  period  in  its  history  has  it  ever 
forsaken  or  abandoned  that  revival  spirit. 
When  it  was  organized,  it  had  three 
ministers — four  with  the  one  whom  they 
•ordained  immediately  after  "constitut- 
ing"— but  one  of  the  number  was  at  the 
time  an  old  man  and  quite  infirm.  But, 
like  the  apostles,  they  gave  all  their 
energies  to  "the  ministry  of  the  word." 


282    CUMBERLAND  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH. 

Wherever  they  went,  gracious  revivals 
were  the  results  of  their  labors,  and 
thousands  upon  thousands  were  added 
to  the  Church.  Being  a  new  organiza- 
tion, the  ministry  met  with  serious  and 
formidable  opposition — could  get  no 
houses  in  which  to  preach,  without,  in 
many  instances,  going  into  school-houses 
and  court-houses,  and  oftentimes  were 
compelled  to  preach  in  the  open  air 
under  a  brush  arbor!  But  they  had  the 
unction  of  the  Spirit,  and  wherever  they 
preached,  "sinners  were  convicted  and 
mourners  were  comforted."  A  large 
portion,  therefore,  of  the  material  which 
they  were  instrumental  in  saving,  wa& 
lost  to  the  Cumberland  Presbvterian 
Church,  because  they  had  no  organiza- 
tions or  church-houses  in  many  of  the 
fields  in  which  they  labored.  But,  in 
spite  of  all  these  embarrassments,  the 
Church  grew  in  an  unprecedented  maur 
ner.     Many,  it  is  true,  predicted  that  in- 


CUMBEKLAND  PKBSBYTERIAN  CHURCH.    283 

a  few  brief  years  the  zeal  of  its  founders 
would  subside,  because,  as  was  asserted, 
it  had  no  theological  stand-point,  ^o 
via  media,  it  was  boldly  asserted,  could 
be  found  between  Calvinism  and  Armin- 
ianism ;  but  a  few  years  corrected  the 
mistake.  The  superstructure  stood,  be- 
cause it  rested  upon  the  solid  rock. 

In  three  years  after  the  Church  was 
organized,  it  had  ministers  enough  to 
form  three  Presbyteries,  and,  conse- 
quently, to  organize  a  Synod.  These 
Presbyteries  met  at  the  Beech  church,  in 
Sumner  county,  Tennessee,  in  the  month 
of  October,  1813,  and  constituted  said 
Synod,  which  received  the  name  of 
Cumberland  Synod.  At  this  meeting  of 
the  Synod  a  brief  statement  was  made 
and  ordered  to  be  published,  setting  forth 
the  points  wherein  Cumberland  Presby- 
terians dissented  from  the  Westminster 
Confession  of  Faith,  and  these  points  are 
as  follows : 


284   CUMBERLAND  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH. 

First.  That  there  are  no  eternal  repro- 
bates. 

Second.  That  Christ  died,  not  for  a 
yart  only,  but  for  all  mankind. 

Third.  That  all  infants  dying  in  in- 
fancy are  saved  through  Christ  and  the 
sanctification  of  the  Spirit. 

Fourth.  That  the  Spirit  of  God  oper- 
ates on  Ihe  world,  or  as  co-extensively  as 
Christ  has  made  atonement,  in  such  a 
manner  as  to  leave  all  men  inexcusable. 

At  this  same  meeting  of  Synod,  too, 
a  committee,  composed  of  Eev.  Messrs. 
Finis  Ewing,  William  McGee,  Robert 
Donnell,  and  Thomas  Calhoun,  was  ap- 
pointed to  prepare  a  Confession  of  Faith, 
setting  forth  the  doctrines  of  the  Cum- 
berland Presbyterian  Church.  In  1814, 
the  report  of  the  committee  was  pre- 
sented to  the  Synod  which  met  at 
Suggs'  Creek  church,  Wilson  county, 
Tennessee,  and  it  was  unanimously 
adopted  as  the   Confession   of  Faith  of 


CUMBERLAND  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH.    285 

the  Cumberland  Presbyterian  Church. 

In  order  to  give  the  reader  some  idea 
of  the  growth  of  said  Church,  we  men- 
tion the  fact  that  in  1820,  ten  years  after 
the  organization,  there  was  quite  a  num- 
ber of  strong  congregations  in  Tennessee, 
Kentucky,  Missouri,  Alabama,  Indiana, 
and  Illinois.  In  the  year  1826,  the  idea 
of  an  institution  of  learning  was  con- 
ceived, which  soon  resulted  in  the  estab- 
lishment of  Princeton  College,  in  the 
town  of  Princeton,  Caldwell  county, 
Kentucky.  In  1828,  the  Cumberland 
Synod  was  large  enough  to  form  four 
Synods,  viz. :  Columbia,  Franklin,  Green 
River,  and  Missouri  Synods.  At  this 
same  meeting  arrangements  were  made 
to  organize  a  General  Assembly;  and 
in  1829,  the  first  General  Assembly  was 
held  in  Princeton,  Kentucky. 

It  will  not  be  out  of  place  to  give  just 
here,  a  few  additional  statistics  to  show 
how  rapidly  the  Church  grew.     In  1822, 


286    CUMBERLAND  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH. 

the  Church  had  forty-six  ministers,  a  d, 
daring  that  year,  two  thousand  seven 
hundred  and  eighteen  persons  were  con- 
verted through  their  instrumentality. 
In  1826,  the  number  of  ministers  had  in- 
creased to  eighty,  and,  during  that  year, 
three  thousand  three  hundred  and  five 
were  converted.  During  the  next  year 
(1827),  there  were  four  thousand  and  six 
professions.  What  an  unparalleled  growth 
do  we  find  in  reviewing  these  facts  and 
figures! 

Passing  by  the  intermediate  years,  for 
want  of  space,  we  give  the  following 
figures  from  the  Minutes  of  the  General 
Assembly  for  1877 :  Ordained  ministers, 
1,283;  licentiates,  257;  candidates,  201; 
Presbj^teries,  110;  Synods,  26;  General 
Assembly,  1;  communicants,  not  less 
than  125,000. 

It  is  also  proper  to  state  in  this  con- 
nection, that  there  is  not  a  more  harmo- 
nious body  of  Christians  on  earth  than 


CUMBERLAND  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH.    287 

iire  the  Cumberland  Presbyterians.  They 
■believe  the  same  things  and  preach  the 
same  things.  The  "  Doctrines "  of 
the  Church  have  never  been  changed, 
nor  is  there  any  probability  that  they 
-ever  will  be  changed.  !N"o  obsolete  dogmas 
clog  this  system.  ITothiug  belongs  to  it 
which  cannot,  on  all  occasions,  be 
preached,  for  it  is  suited  to  the  saint  and 
to  the  sinner — to  all  classes  and  condi- 
tions. Besides,  it  has  been  tried  as  by 
fire,  and  it  has  stood  the  test. 

VI. ITS  FRATERNITY  AND  CONSERVATISM. 

N"o  class  of  ministers  in  the  world  are 
more  fraternal,  if  indeed  as  much  so,  as 
are  the  preachers  in  the  Cumberland 
Presbyterian  Church.  They  are  ready 
for  every  good  word  and  work;  and 
side  by  side  they  have  stood,  and  side 
by  side  do  they  now  stand,  with  all  who 
labor  for  the  advancement  of  the  Re- 
deemer's kingdom — for  the  propagation 


288    CUMBERLAND  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH 

of  a  religion  vitalized  by  the  Holy  Ghost 
During  its  whole  history  it  has  been  a 
Church  of  peace,  and  when  it  was  re- 
viled, it  followed  the  example  of  the 
blessed  Saviour,  and  "  reviled  not  again.'" 
Its  policy,  too,  has  ever  been  to  keep 
Church  and  State  separate — to  "render 
unto  Csesar  the  things  that  are  Caesar's, 
and  unto  God  the  things  that  are 
God's."  The  great  civil  war  between 
the  iTorth  and  the  South — a  conflict 
which  deluged  the  United  States  in 
blood,  and  which  rent  in  twain  the  lead- 
ing denominations  not  previously  severed 
by  political  feuds — was  not  sufllcient  to 
divide  the  Cumberland  Presbyterian 
Church.  This  denomination  has  never 
prostituted  the  pulpit  nor  the  religious 
press  to  political  ends.  With  it,  the 
Church  has  ever  been  considered  an 
asylum  for  the  heart,  and  not  an  arena 
for  fierce  and  bitter  contests  in  regard 
to  the  kingdoms  of  this  world. 


CUMBERLAND  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH.    28^ 

With  such  a  Church,  then,  who  can^ 
find  fault  ?  And  when  a  serious,  thought- 
ful person — man  or  woman — is  trying  tc 
decide  the  question  which  denomination 
he  or  she  should  unite  with,  can  there  be; 
found  one  whose  doctrines  and  govern- 
ment are  more  in  accord  with  the  teach- 
ings of  the  Bible  than  those  of  the  Cum- 
berland Presbyterian  Church  ?  It  is  true, 
it  has  not  the  age  nor  the  numbers  of 
Bome  others,  but  what  difference  does 
that  make?  Such  items  should  not,  and 
do  not,  weigh  a  feather  with  a  conscien- 
tious man  or  woman.  The  point  is,  which 
Church,  in  its  Theology  and  Governmenty 
comes  nearest  to  the  Bible?  When  that 
question  is  settled,  there  is  but  one  course 
for  a  sincere  inquirer  to  pursue — -join 
that  Church  if  it  is  not  ten  years  old, 
and  if  it  did  not  have  one  thousand 
members,  all  told.  But  even  on  these 
items — age  and  numbers — who  can  ob- 
ject to  the  Cumberland  Presbyteriani 
19 


290    CUMBERLAND  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH. 

Church  ?  It  has  outstripped  all  others  in 
proportion  to  age — is  now  second  in  mem- 
bership, in  the  United  States,  among  the 
whole  family  of  Presbyterian  Churches! 
And  though  it  does  not  make  a  classical 
education  a  sine  qua  non  to  entering 
the  sacred  jjrofession,  yet  no  eccle- 
siastical denomination  more  strongly 
favors  a  highly  educated  ministry,  when 
circumstances  justify  such  extensive  cul- 
ture. As  proof  of  this,  the  Church, 
though  still  in  its  infancy,  not  only 
stands  abreast  with  the  older  and  more 
powerful  denominations  in  its  institu- 
tions of  learning,  but  it  now  embraces 
in  its  ministry  many  of  the  finest  scholars 
and  most  vigorous  thinkers  of  the  age. 

In  conclusion,  the  reader  will  permit 
a  personal  reference.  While  with  Paul 
I  can  say,  "By  the  grace  of  God,  I  am 
what  I  am,'"  yet  it  is  a  fact  that  that 
grace  has  reached  me  through  the  chan- 
nel   of    the     Cuniberlaud     Presbyterian 


CUMBERLAND  PRESP.YTKHIAN  riirKClI.    201 

Chnrcli.  When  I  was  a  poor,  trenibrnig 
Binner,  ministers  in  that  Chiircli  led  me, 
as  I  hnmbly  trust,  to  Christ.  After- 
wards, tliat  same  denomination  took 
me  by  the  hand,  when  I  was  a  penniless 
boy,  and  educated  me  for  the  ministry. 
For  this  latter  favor,  however,  I  am 
esprcially  indebte<i  to  lion,  liobcrt  L_ 
Caruthers  and  his  excellent  wife,  of  Lelj- 
nnon,  Tennessee.  For  four  years  their 
house  was  my  home,  and  while  I  was  with 
them,  ever}"  temporal  want  was  supplied. 
Mrs.  Caruthers,  one  of  the  best  women 
that  ever  lived,  has  passed  over  the  river, 
and  is  in  the  city  and  paradise  of  God; 
therefore,  *'  she  rests  from  her  labors,  and 
her  works  do  follow  her."  Judge  Caruth- 
ers, at  this  writing  (1877),  still  lives  ;  and 
like  the  proud  old  oak  that  has  with- 
stood a  thousand  storms,  he  tourers  above 
his  fellows.  Though  called  upon  to  fill 
some  of  the  highest  political  and  judicial 
positions   within   the  gift   of   this  greal 


292    CUMBEHLAND  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH. 

nation,  yet  his  hand  and  his  purse  have 
ever  been  at  the  command  of  the  Cum- 
berland Presbyterian  Church — a  Churcii 
within  whose  communion  he  has  been  a 
most  efficient  ruling  elder  for  more  than 
half  a  century.  Though  he  became 
connected  with  that  Church  when  it  was 
only  a  "  little  flock,"  yet  by  its  side  he  has 
ever  stood  as  one  of  its  best  friends,  and 
as  one  of  its  wisest  counsellors.  And,  die 
when  he  may,  no  man  can  take  his  place 
— can  fill  the  vacuum  that  will  be  made. 
Of  him  it  can  be  truly  said,  as  it  was  of 
the  intrepid  Greek  warrior,  "I^To  man 
can  bend  his  bow  or  bear  his  shield." 

Without  the  knowledge  or  consent 
of  Judge  Caruthers,  this  brief  tribute 
of  afifection  and  gratitude  has  been  writ- 
ten; nor  could  the  author  of  this  little 
book  consent  to  "die  and  go  hence," 
without  making  this  public  acknowl- 
edgment. God  bless  his  name  and 
memory  for  ever !   And,  now  that  he  is  iu 


CUMBERLAND  PRESBYTERIAN  CHURCH.    293 

the  evening  of  life,  may  the  light  which 
falls  upon  his  pathway  be  as  the  soft, 
mellow  rays  which  gild  the  vales  and 
the  hilltops  of  a  quiet,  beautiful,  autum- 
nal sunset — yea,  may  that  light  "shine 
more  and  more  unto  the  perfect  day." 

One  more  paragraph  and  this  little 
book  is  finished.  The  Church  in  behalf 
of  which  these  pages  have  been  written, 
will  live  as  long  as  time  shall  last;  and, 
when  in  the  tinal  day,  "  the  captain  of 
our  salvation"  shall,  with  the  "Old  Ship 
of  Zion,"  lead  the  other  vessels  into  the 
harbor,  side  by  side  with  them  will  sail 
that  glorious  ship,  the  Cumberland  Pres- 
byterian, with  her  colors  flying  and  her 
crew  shouting,  "  Unto  him  that  loved  us, 
.and  washed  us  from  our  sins  in  his  own 
blood,  be  glory  and  dominion  for  ever 
;ftnd  ever.     Amen." 


THE    END. 


Date  Due 

Cg*^^g 

ilS««iakS-> 

^.^ 

MM 

1^ 

fiWPf*^ 

r 

f) 

PRINTED 

IN  U.  S.  A. 

